Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2024
Blueprint for Building and Sustaining a Cardiogenic Shock Program: Qualitative Survey of 12 US Programs.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yau Raymond M, Mitchell Robyn, Afzal Aasim, George Timothy J, Siddiqullah Syed, Bharadwaj Aditya S, Truesdell Alexander G, Rosner Carolyn, Basir Mir B, Fisher Ruth, Dupont Allison, Alviar Carlos Leon, Chweich Haval, Kapur Navin K, Patel Rajan A G, Silvestry Scott, Patel Sandeep M, Abraham Jacob
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary cardiogenic shock (CS) programs have been associated with improved outcomes, yet practical guidance for developing a CS program is lacking.
METHODS: A survey on CS program development and operational best practices was administered to 12 institutions in diverse sociogeographic regions and practice settings. Common steps in program development were identified.
RESULTS: Key steps for program development were identified: measuring baseline outcomes; identifying subspecialty champions; gaining leadership and team buy-in; developing institution-specific CS protocols; educating staff and referring providers; consulting with external experts; and developing quality assessment and process improvement.
CONCLUSIONS: An assessment of 12 US CS programs highlights a blueprint for establishing and maintaining a successful, multidisciplinary shock program.
METHODS: A survey on CS program development and operational best practices was administered to 12 institutions in diverse sociogeographic regions and practice settings. Common steps in program development were identified.
RESULTS: Key steps for program development were identified: measuring baseline outcomes; identifying subspecialty champions; gaining leadership and team buy-in; developing institution-specific CS protocols; educating staff and referring providers; consulting with external experts; and developing quality assessment and process improvement.
CONCLUSIONS: An assessment of 12 US CS programs highlights a blueprint for establishing and maintaining a successful, multidisciplinary shock program.