The effectiveness of a needleless intravenous system in prevention of percutaneous injury in two hospitals

This study assessed if hospital-wide implementation of a needleless intravenous connection system reduces the number of reported percutaneous injuries, overall and those specifically due to intravenous connection activities.^ Incidence rates were compared before and after hospital-wide implementation of a needleless intravenous system at two hospitals, a full service general hospital and a pediatric hospital. The years 1989-1991 were designated as pre-implementation and 1993 was designated as post-implementation. Data from 1992 were not included in the effectiveness evaluation to allow employees to become familiar with use of the new device. The two hospitals showed rate ratios of 1.37 (95% CI = 1.22-1.54, p $\le$.0001) and 1.63 (95% CI = 1.34-1.97, p $\le$.0001), or a 27.1% and a 38.6% reduction in overall injury rate, respectively. Rate ratios for intravenous connection injuries were 2.67 (95% CI = 1.89-3.78, p $\le$.0001) and 3.35 (95% CI = 1.87-6.02, p $\le$.0001), or a 62.5% and a 69.9% reduction in injury rate, respectively. Rate ratios for all non-intravenous connection injuries were calculated to control for factors other than device implementation that may have been operating to reduce the injury rate. These rate ratios were lower, 1.21 and 1.44, demonstrating the magnitude of injury reduction due to factors other than device implementation. It was concluded that the device was effective in reduction of numbers of reported percutaneous injuries.^ Use-effectiveness of the system was also assessed by a survey of randomly selected device users to determine satisfaction with the device, frequency of use and barriers to use. Four hundred seventy-eight surveys were returned for a response rate of 50.9%. Approximately 94% of respondents at both hospitals expressed satisfaction with the needleless system and recommended continued use. The survey also revealed that even though over 50% of respondents report using the device "always" or "most of the time" for intravenous medication administration, flushing lines, and connecting secondary intravenous lines, needles were still being used for these same activities. Compatibility, accessibility and other technical problems were reported as reasons for using needles for these activities. These problems must be addressed, by both manufacturers and users, before the needleless system will be effective in prevention of all intravenous connection injuries. ^

The effect of the shift from HMO to PPO plans on the prevalence of hospital bad debt in the insured population: A case study in two Houston-area hospitals

In spite of the dramatic increase and general concern with U.S. hospital bad debt expense (AMNews, January 12, 2004; Philadelphia Business Journal, April 30, 2004; WSJ, July 23, 2004), there appears to be little available analysis of the precise sources and causes of its growth. This is particularly true in terms of the potential contribution of insured patients to bad debt expense in light of the recent shift in managed care from health maintenance organization (HMO) plans to preferred provider organization (PPO) plans (Kaiser Annual Survey Report, 2003). This study examines and attempts to explain the recent dramatic growth in bad debt expense by focusing on and analyzing data from two Houston-area hospital providers within one healthcare system. In contrast to prior studies in which self-pay was found to be the primary source of hospital bad debt expense (Saywell, R. M., et al., 1989; Zollinger, T. W., 1991; Weissman, Joel S., et al., 1999), this study hypothesizes that the growing hospital bad debt expense is mainly due to the shifting trend away from HMOs to PPOs as a conscious decision by employers to share costs with employees. Compared to HMO plans, the structure of PPOs includes higher co-pays, coinsurance, and deductibles for the patient-pay portion of medical bills, creating the potential for an increase in bad debt for hospital providers (from a case study). This bad debt expense has a greater impact in the community hospital than in the Texas Medical Center hospital. ^