Patient classification system: An integrated method for measuring nursing intensity and optimizing resource allocation

A patient classification system was developed integrating a patient acuity instrument with a computerized nursing distribution method based on a linear programming model. The system was designed for real-time measurement of patient acuity (workload) and allocation of nursing personnel to optimize the utilization of resources.^ The acuity instrument was a prototype tool with eight categories of patients defined by patient severity and nursing intensity parameters. From this tool, the demand for nursing care was defined in patient points with one point equal to one hour of RN time. Validity and reliability of the instrument was determined as follows: (1) Content validity by a panel of expert nurses; (2) predictive validity through a paired t-test analysis of preshift and postshift categorization of patients; (3) initial reliability by a one month pilot of the instrument in a practice setting; and (4) interrater reliability by the Kappa statistic.^ The nursing distribution system was a linear programming model using a branch and bound technique for obtaining integer solutions. The objective function was to minimize the total number of nursing personnel used by optimally assigning the staff to meet the acuity needs of the units. A penalty weight was used as a coefficient of the objective function variables to define priorities for allocation of staff.^ The demand constraints were requirements to meet the total acuity points needed for each unit and to have a minimum number of RNs on each unit. Supply constraints were: (1) total availability of each type of staff and the value of that staff member (value was determined relative to that type of staff's ability to perform the job function of an RN (i.e., value for eight hours RN = 8 points, LVN = 6 points); (2) number of personnel available for floating between units.^ The capability of the model to assign staff quantitatively and qualitatively equal to the manual method was established by a thirty day comparison. Sensitivity testing demonstrated appropriate adjustment of the optimal solution to changes in penalty coefficients in the objective function and to acuity totals in the demand constraints.^ Further investigation of the model documented: correct adjustment of assignments in response to staff value changes; and cost minimization by an addition of a dollar coefficient to the objective function. ^

Crack and powder cocaine federal legislation: A sentencing disparity and potential for policy improvement

Since its introduction into the United States in the 1980s, crack cocaine has been a harsh epidemic that has taken its toll on a countless number of people. This highly addictive, cheap and readily available drug of abuse has permeated many demographic sectors, mostly in low income, lesser educated, and urban communities. This epidemic of crack cocaine use in inner city areas across the Unites States has been described as an expression of economic marginality and “social suffering” coupled with the local and international forces of drug market economies (Agar 2003). As crack cocaine is a derivative of cocaine, it utilizes the psychoactive component of the drug, but delivers it in a much stronger, quicker, and more addictive fashion. This, coupled with its ready availability and cheap price has allowed for users to not only become very addicted very quickly, but to be subject to the stringent and sometimes unequal or inconsistent punishments for possession and distribution of crack-cocaine. ^ There are many public health and social ramifications from the abuse of crack-cocaine, and these epidemics appear to target low income and minority groups. Public health issues relating to the physical, mental, and economic strain will be addressed, as well as the direct and indirect effects of the punishments that come as a result of the disparity in penalties for cocaine and crack-cocaine possession and distribution. ^ Three new policies have recently been introduced into the United Stated Congress that actively address the disparity in sentencing for drug and criminal activities. They are, (1) Powder-Crack Cocaine Penalty Equalization Act of 2009, (HR 18, 111th Cong. 2009), (2) The Drug Sentencing Reform and Cocaine Kingpin Trafficking Act of 2009, (HR 265, 111th Cong. 2009) and (3) The Justice Integrity Act of 2009, (111th Cong. 2009). ^ Although they have only been initiated, if passed, they have potential to not only eliminate the crack-cocaine disparity, but to enact laws that help those affected by this epidemic. The final and overarching goal of this paper is to analyze and ultimately choose the ideal policy that would not only eliminate the cocaine and crack disparity regardless of current or future state statutes, but will provide the best method of rehabilitation, prevention, and justice. ^

The movement toward patient safety: State action related to reporting and disclosure of healthcare-associated infections

Increasing attention has been given to the problem of medical errors over the past decade. Included within that focused attention has been a strong interest in reducing the occurrence of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). Acting concurrently with federal initiatives, the majority of U.S. states have statutorily required reporting and public disclosure of HAI data. Although the occurrence of these state statutory enactments and other state initiatives represent a recognition of the strong concern pertaining to HAIs, vast differences in each state’s HAI reporting and public disclosure requirements creates a varied and unequal response to what has become a national problem.^ The purpose of this research was to explore the variations in state HAI legal requirements and other state mandates. State actions, including statutory enactments, regulations, and other initiatives related to state reporting and public disclosure mechanisms were compared, discussed, and analyzed in an effort to illustrate the impact of the lack of uniformity as a public health concern.^ The HAI statutes, administrative requirements, and other mandates of each state and two U.S. territories were reviewed to answer the following seven research questions: How far has the state progressed in its HAI initiative? If the state has a HAI reporting requirement, is it mandatory or voluntary? What healthcare entities are subject to the reporting requirements? What data collection system is utilized? What measures are required to be reported? What is the public disclosure mechanism? How is the underlying reported information protected from public disclosure or other legal release?^ Secondary publicly available data, including state statutes, administrative rules, and other initiatives, were utilized to examine the current HAI-related legislative and administrative activity of the study subjects. The information was reviewed and analyzed to determine variations in HAI reporting and public disclosure laws. Particular attention was given to the seven key research questions.^ The research revealed that considerable progress has been achieved in state HAI initiatives since 2004. Despite this progress, however, when reviewing the state laws and HAI programs comparatively, considerable variations were found to exist with regards to the type of reporting requirements, healthcare facilities subject to the reporting laws, data collection systems utilized, reportable measures, public disclosure requirements, and confidentiality and privilege provisions. The wide variations in state statutes, administrative rules, and other agency directives create a fragmented and inconsistent approach to addressing the nationwide occurrence of HAIs in the U.S. healthcare system. ^