Revising the National Ambient Air Quality Standards: The integration of science and policy

Under the Clean Air Act, Congress granted discretionary decision making authority to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This discretionary authority involves setting standards to protect the public's health with an "adequate margin of safety" based on current scientific knowledge. The Administrator of the EPA is usually not a scientist, and for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM), the Administrator faced the task of revising a standard when several scientific factors were ambiguous. These factors included: (1) no identifiable threshold below which health effects are not manifested, (2) no biological basis to explain the reported associations between particulate matter and adverse health effects, and (3) no consensus among the members of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) as to what an appropriate PM indicator, averaging period, or value would be for the revised standard. ^ This project recommends and demonstrates a tool, integrated assessment (IA), to aid the Administrator in making a public health policy decision in the face of ambiguous scientific factors. IA is an interdisciplinary approach to decision making that has been used to deal with complex issues involving many uncertainties, particularly climate change analyses. Two IA approaches are presented; a rough set analysis by which the expertise of CASAC members can be better utilized, and a flag model for incorporating the views of stakeholders into the standard setting process. ^ The rough set analysis can describe minimal and maximal conditions about the current science pertaining to PM and health effects. Similarly, a flag model can evaluate agreement or lack of agreement by various stakeholder groups to the proposed standard in the PM review process. ^ The use of these IA tools will enable the Administrator to (1) complete the NAAQS review in a manner that is in closer compliance with the Clean Air Act, (2) expand the input from CASAC, (3) take into consideration the views of the stakeholders, and (4) retain discretionary decision making authority. ^

Hypotensive resuscitation versus standard fluid resuscitation for the management of trauma patients in hemorrhagic shock: The safety phase of a randomized controlled trial

Trauma is a leading cause of death worldwide, and is thus a major public health concern. Improving current resuscitation strategies may help to reduce morbidity and mortality from trauma, and clinical research plays an important role in addressing these issues. This thesis is a secondary analysis of data that was collected for a randomized clinical trial being conducted at Ben Taub General Hospital. The trial is designed to compare a hypotensive resuscitation strategy to standard fluid resuscitation for the early treatment of trauma patients in hemorrhagic shock. This thesis examines the clinical outcomes from the first 90 subjects enrolled in the study, with the primary aim of assessing the safety of hypotensive resuscitation within the trauma population. ^ Patients in hemorrhagic shock who required emergent surgery were randomized to one of two arms of the study. Those in the experimental (LMAP) arm were managed with a hypotensive resuscitation strategy in which the target mean arterial pressure was 50mmHg. Those in the control (HMAP) arm were managed with standard fluid resuscitation to a target mean arterial pressure of 65mmHg. Patients were followed for 30 days. Mortality, post-operative complications, and other clinical data were prospectively gathered by the Ben Taub surgical staff and then secondarily analyzed for the purpose of this thesis.^ Subjects in the LMAP group had significantly lower early post-operative mortality compared to those in the HMAP group. 30-day mortality was also lower in the LMAP group, although this did not reach statistical significance. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups with regards to development of ischemic, hematologic or infectious complications, length of hospitalization, length of ICU stay or duration of mechanical ventilation. ^ Based upon the data presented in this thesis, it appears that hypotensive resuscitation is a safe strategy for use in the trauma population. Specifically, hypotensive resuscitation reduced the risk of early post-operative death from coagulopathic bleeding and did not result in an increased risk of ischemic or other post-operative complications. The preliminary results described in this thesis provide convincing evidence support the continued investigation and use of hypotensive resuscitation in a trauma setting.^

Development of a standard sign-out procedure for clinicians in a pediatric intensive care unit

Background: Poor communication among health care providers is cited as the most common cause of sentinel events involving patients. Sign-out of patient data at the change of clinician shifts is a component of communication that is especially vulnerable to errors. Sign-outs are particularly extensive and complex in intensive care units (ICUs). There is a paucity of validated tools to assess ICU sign-outs. ^ Objective: To design a valid and reliable survey tool to assess the perceptions of Pediatric ICU (PICU) clinicians about sign-out. ^ Design: Cross-sectional, web-based survey ^ Setting: Academic hospital, 31-bed PICU ^ Subjects: Attending faculty, fellows, nurse practitioners and physician assistants. ^ Interventions: A survey was designed with input from a focus group and administered to PICU clinicians. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency and validity of the survey tool were assessed. ^ Measurements and Main Results: Forty-eight PICU clinicians agreed to participate. We had 42(88%) and 40(83%) responses in the test and retest phases. The mean scores for the ten survey items ranged from 2.79 to 3.67 on a five point Likert scale with no significant test-retest difference and a Pearson correlation between pre and post answers of 0.65. The survey item scores showed internal consistency with a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.85. Exploratory factor analysis revealed three constructs: efficacy of sign-out process, recipient satisfaction and content applicability. Seventy eight % clinicians affirmed the need for improvement of the sign-out process and 83% confirmed the need for face- to-face verbal sign-out. A system-based sign-out format was favored by fellows and advanced level practitioners while attendings preferred a problem-based format (p=0.003). ^ Conclusions: We developed a valid and reliable survey to assess clinician perceptions about the ICU sign-out process. These results can be used to design a verbal template to improve and standardize the sign-out process.^