Adventist HealthCare Rehabilitation

Understanding how to incorporate exercise into metabolic and bariatric surgery programs to optimize treatment outcomes is of great interest, as evidenced by 11 reviews published on this topic in 2022 alone.This overview of reviews was conducted to create a single cohesive resource to aid clinicians and researchers by exploring the effects of pre-and postoperative exercise training on health outcomes.A literature search of seven electronic databases was performed (updated 09/2023) and 24 reviews met preset PICOS eligibility criteria and were included: 4 exploring preoperative exercise training, 13 postoperative, and 7 both.Comparing reviews, outcome results were organized as concordant, discordant, or inconclusive, and then categorized into "what we currently know", "what we think we know" and "what we still don't know".We do not currently know the effects of pre-or postoperative exercise training on any outcomes, but we think we know that preoperative exercise training has a positive effect on BMI and 6-minute walking test distance, and postoperative exercise training has a positive effect on body weight and BMI, waist circumference, bone mineral density, 6-minute walking test distance, muscle strength, and systolic blood pressure.Despite the abundance of research, much still needs to be done in terms of enhancing methodological rigor and reporting to achieve greater confidence in our conclusions; recommendations for next research steps are made

Throughout history, pandemics and their aftereffects have spurred society to make substantial improvements in healthcare. After the Black Death in 14th century Europe, changes were made to elevate standards of care and nutrition that resulted in improved life expectancy.1 The 1918 influenza pandemic spurred a movement that emphasized public health surveillance and detection of future outbreaks and eventually led to the creation of the World Health Organization Global Influenza Surveillance Network.2 In the present, the COVID-19 pandemic exposed many of the pre-existing problems within the US healthcare system, which included (1) a lack of capacity to manage a large influx of contagious patients while simultaneously maintaining routine and emergency care to non-COVID patients; (2) a “just in time” supply network that led to shortages and competition among hospitals, nursing homes, and other care sites for essential supplies; and (3) longstanding inequities in the distribution of healthcare and the healthcare workforce. The decades-long shift from domestic manufacturing to a reliance on global supply chains has compounded ongoing gaps in preparedness for supplies such as personal protective equipment and ventilators. Inequities in racial and socioeconomic outcomes highlighted during the pandemic have accelerated the call to focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within our communities. The pandemic accelerated cooperation between government entities and the healthcare system, resulting in swift implementation of mitigation measures, new therapies and vaccinations at unprecedented speeds, despite our fragmented healthcare delivery system and political divisions. Still, widespread misinformation or disinformation and political divisions contributed to eroded trust in the public health system and prevented an even uptake of mitigation measures, vaccines and therapeutics, impeding our ability to contain the spread of the virus in this country.3 Ultimately, the lessons of COVID-19 illustrate the need to better prepare for the next pandemic. Rising microbial resistance, emerging and re-emerging pathogens, increased globalization, an aging population, and climate change are all factors that increase the likelihood of another pandemic.4

The authors have requested that this preprint be removed from Research Square.

BACKGROUND We conducted a retrospective cohort study on COVID-19 patients with and without dementia by extracting data from the HCA Healthcare Enterprise Data Warehouse between January-September 2020. AIMS To describe the role of patients' baseline characteristics specifically dementia in determining overall health outcomes in COVID-19 patients. METHODS We grouped in-patients who had ICD-10 codes for dementia (DM) with age and gender-matched (1:2) patients without dementia (ND). Our primary outcome variables were in-hospital mortality, length of stay, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, ICU-free days, mechanical ventilation (MV) use, MV-free days and 90-day re-admission. RESULTS Matching provided similar age and sex in DM and ND groups. BMI (median, 25.8 vs. 27.6) and proportion of patients who had smoked (23.3% vs. 31.3%) were lower in DM than in ND patients. The median (IQR) Elixhauser Comorbidity Index was higher in dementia patients 7 (5-10) vs. 5 (3-7, p < 0.01). Higher mortality was observed in DM group (30.8%) vs. ND group (26.4%, p < 0.01) as an unadjusted univariate analysis. The 90-day readmission was not different (32.1% vs. 31.8%, p=0.8). In logistic regression analysis, the odds of dying were not different between patients in DM and ND groups (OR=1.0; 95% CI 0.86-1.17), but the odds of ICU admissions were significantly lower for dementia patients (OR=0.58, 95% CI 0.51-0.66). CONCLUSIONS Our data showed that COVID-19 patients with dementia did not fare substantially worse, but in fact, fared better when certain metrics were considered.

The objective of this study is to identify the incidence of and risk factors for urinary tract infection (UTI) after office cystoscopy and urodynamic studies (UDS) in a female population. This was a retrospective cohort study investigating incidence of and risk factors for UTI after office testing. Inclusion criteria included women presenting for either cystoscopy or UDS from September 2019 to February 2020. Modified Poisson regression with robust error variance was used to identify risk factors for UTI after cystoscopy and UDS in a female population. A total of 274 patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred eighty-five patients underwent office cystoscopy. Nine (4.8%) had a postcystoscopy UTI. Significant risk factors for postcystoscopy UTI included recurrent UTI (relative risk, 7.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-34.05) and a history of interstitial cystitis (relative risk, 4.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-13.73). Of those with recurrent UTI, 13.7% had a postcystoscopy UTI. Among patients with interstitial cystitis, 25% had a postcystoscopy UTI. One hundred ninety-two patients underwent UDS. Ten (5.2%) developed a post-UDS UTI. No risk factors were identified. Patients with recurrent UTI were 7.51 times more likely to develop a UTI after cystoscopy, whereas those with interstitial cystitis were 4.56 times more likely to develop a UTI after cystoscopy. The incidence of UTI after UDS was low overall. Understanding who is at higher risk of postprocedural UTIs may help identify subpopulations that may benefit from prophylactic strategies.

Objective To develop an ethically, legally, and clinically appropriate ventilator allocation policy for AdventHealth Tampa and AdventHealth Carrollwood in Tampa, Florida, which could be enacted swiftly during the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods During Spring 2020, a subcommittee of the Medical Ethics Committee established consensus on the fundamental principles of the policy, then built on existing ethical, legal, and clinical guidance. Results The plan was finalized in May 2020. The plan triages patients based on exclusion criteria (imminent mortality), prognosis and expected benefit of ventilation (using the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment), and change in prognosis over time. Decisions are made by committee in order to minimize moral distress among individual patient care providers. Conclusions Due to international concerns about healthcare resource shortages during the Covid-19 pandemic, hospitals need allocation policies informed by the crisis standard of care, the hospital’s ethical duty to plan for an emergency, and federal civil rights laws Policy Implications: This type of policy can serve as a model for other institutions to develop crisis standards of care resource allocation policies, which are a necessary component of disaster planning.

ObjectiveTo compare the processes and outcomes of care in patients who had a stroke treated in urban versus rural hospitals in Australia.DesignObservational study using data from a multicentre national registry.SettingData from 50 acute care hospitals in Australia (25 urban, 25 rural) which participated in the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry during the period 2010–2015.ParticipantsPatients were divided into two groups (urban, rural) according to the Australian Standard Geographical Classification Remoteness Area classification. Data pertaining to 28 115 patients who had a stroke were analysed, of whom 8159 (29%) were admitted to hospitals located within rural areas.Primary and secondary outcome measuresRegional differences in processes of care (admission to a stroke unit, thrombolysis for ischaemic stroke, discharge on antihypertensive medication and provision of a care plan), and survival analyses up to 180 days and health-related quality of life at 90–180 days.ResultsCompared with those admitted to urban hospitals, patients in rural hospitals less often received thrombolysis (urban 12.7% vs rural 7.5%, p<0.001) or received treatment in stroke units (urban 82.2% vs rural 76.5%, p<0.001), and fewer were discharged with a care plan (urban 61.3% vs rural 44.7%, p<0.001). No significant differences were found in terms of survival or overall self-reported quality of life.ConclusionsRural access to recommended components of acute stroke care was comparatively poorer; however, this did not appear to impact health outcomes at approximately 6 months.

Background: There is a critical need for comprehensive and effective healthcare- associated infection and antibiotic resistance (HAI/AR) programs in the United States. Since 2009, the CDC has funded and engaged public health, healthcare, academic, community, corporate, federal, and other stakeholders to develop effective HAI programs that rely upon such these stakeholders for success. State and local public health programs play a central role in these programs because they bridge healthcare and the community. They may regulate and assess facilities, collect and validate data on infections, and implement prevention programs. Myriad other state, federal, and privately supported stakeholders play essential roles. CDC is developing a framework for highly effective state HAI/AR programs that describes core program elements and can be used as a strategic tool, both in day to day processes and in a public health crisis, such the COVID-19 response. Program elements may include engaged leaders and champions, reliable data for action, effective policies, evaluation, program innovation, communications, and partner networks. This presentation describes a success framework for developing and leveraging HAI/AR partner networks to achieve and sustain their capacities and impact.Methods: CDC collected qualitative data in select states and combined with expert opinion to draft core elements for success among a network of partners working to achieve HAI/AR and COVID-19 response and prevention in states. The core elements serve as a foundation for the framework. Ongoing analyses will inform refinement of the core elements and framework. The CDC is gathering stakeholders’ input on the framework for applicability and usability in states, with the goal of national implementation. Results: Currently, data indicate the following core elements for partner networks: leadership, strategy and structure; policies; innovation and adaptability; implementation; expertise and resources; communications; and monitoring and evaluation. The framework includes a process for partner network development and sustenance, maturity levels, and supporting tools. States have reported support for core elements and agreed that a success framework is beneficial to achieving core elements. Multiple states have reported support for a process that includes building partner networks and clearly defining roles, as a critical step toward full implementation of Program core elements. Conclusions: A framework for building high-level strategy and competency in partner networks has never been developed for HAI/AR programs. Effective partner networks represent an essential core element of a comprehensive state HAI/AR program. This framework could be applied to a variety of programs and public health contexts, increasing the effectiveness of partner networks.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Integrated services which utilise the expertise of team members along care pathways are evolving. Changes in service structure and subsequent team working arrangements can be a challenge for practitioners expected to redefine how they work with one another. These services are particularly important for the care of frail older people. This exploratory study of one newly forming team presents the views of staff involved in establishing an interprofessional healthcare advisory team for older people within an acute hospital admissions unit. Staff experiences of forming a new service are aligned to a model of team development. The findings are presented as themes relating to the stages of team development and identify the challenges of setting up an integrated service alongside existing services. In particular, team process issues relating to the clarity of goals, role clarification, leadership, team culture and identity. Managers must allow time to ensure new services evolve before setting up evaluation studies for efficiency and effectiveness which might prove against the potential for interprofessional teamworking.