Cost-effectiveness of universal prophylaxis in pregnancy with prior group B streptococci colonization.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the costs and outcomes of rescreening for group B streptococci (GBS) compared to universal treatment of term women with history of GBS colonization in a previous pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: A decision analysis model was used to compare costs and outcomes. Total cost included the costs of screening, intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP), treatment for maternal anaphylaxis and death, evaluation of well infants whose mothers received IAP, and total costs for treatment of term neonatal early onset GBS sepsis. RESULTS: When compared to screening and treating, universal treatment results in more women treated per GBS case prevented (155 versus 67) and prevents more cases of early onset GBS (1732 versus 1700) and neonatal deaths (52 versus 51) at a lower cost per case prevented ($8,805 versus $12,710). CONCLUSION: Universal treatment of term pregnancies with a history of previous GBS colonization is more cost-effective than the strategy of screening and treating based on positive culture results.

THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A SURVEY INSTRUMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF OCCUPATIONAL STRESS

Using stress and coping as a unifying theoretical concept, a series of five models was developed in order to synthesize the survey questions and to classify information. These models identified the question, listed the research study, described measurements, listed workplace data, and listed industry and national reference data.^ A set of 38 instrument questions was developed within the five coping correlate categories. In addition, a set of 22 stress symptoms was also developed. The study was conducted within two groups, police and professors, on a large university campus. The groups were selected because their occupations were diverse, but they were a part of the same macroenvironment. The premise was that police officers would be more highly stressed than professors.^ Of a total study group of 80, there were 37 respondents. The difference in the mean stress responses was observable between the two groups. Not only were the responses similar within each group, but the stress level of response was also similar within each group. While the response to the survey instrument was good, only 3 respondents answered the stress symptom survey properly. It was determined that none of the 37 respondents believed that they were ill. This perception of being well was also evidenced by the grand mean of the stress scores of 2.76 (3.0 = moderate stress). This also caused fewer independent variables to be entered in the multiple regression model.^ The survey instrument was carefully designed to be universal. Universality is the ability to transcend occupational or regional definitions as applied to stress. It is the ability to measure responses within broad categories such as physiological, emotional, behavioral, social, and cognitive functions without losing the ability to measure the detail within the individual questions, or the relationships between questions and categories.^ Replication is much easier to achieve with standardized categories, questions, and measurement procedures such as those developed for the universal survey instrument. Because the survey instrument is universal it can be used as an analytical device, an assessment device, a basic tool for planning and a follow-up instrument to measure individual response to planned reductions in occupational stress. (Abstract shortened with permission of author.) ^

Use of universal precautions in the workplace: A comparison of two fire /EMS services

The Health Belief Model (HBM) provided the theoretical framework for examining Universal Precautions (UP) compliance factors by Firefighter, EMTs and Paramedics (prehospital care providers). A convenient sample of prehospital care providers (n = 4000) from two cities (Houston and Washington DC), were surveyed to explore the factors related to their decision to comply with Universal Precautions. Eight hundred and sixty-five useable questionnaires were analyzed. The responders were primarily male (95.7%) eight hundred and twenty-eight and thirty-seven were female, prehospital based (100%), EMTs (60.0%) and paramedics (12.8%) who had a mean 13 years of prehospital care experience. ^ Linear regression was used to evaluate the four hypotheses. The first hypothesis evaluating perceived susceptibility and seriousness with reported UP use was statistically significant (p = < .05). Perceived susceptibility, when considered independently, did not make a significant contribution (t = −4.2852; p = 0.0000) to the stated use of Universal precautions. The hypothesis is not supported as stated. The data indicates the opposite effect. Supported is the premise that as perceived susceptibility and perceived seriousness increase the use of Universal Precautions decreases. Hypothesis two tested perceived benefits with internal and external barriers. Both perceived benefits and internal and external barriers as well as the overall regression were significant (F = 112.6, p = 0.0000). The contribution of internal and external barriers was statistically significant (t = 0.0175; p = 0.0000) and (t = 0.0128; p = 0.0000). Hypothesis three which tested modifying factors, cues to action, select demographic variables, and the main effects of the HBM with self reported UP compliance overall was significant. The variables gender, birth, education, job type, EMS certification, years of service, years of experience providing patient care, Universal Precautions training hours, type of apparatus assigned to and the number of EMS related incidents responded to in a month were found to have a significant contribution to the stated use of Universal Precautions. ^ The additive effects were tested by use of a stepwise regression that assessed the contribution of each of the significant variables. Three variables in the equation were statistically significant. Internal barriers (t = −8.5507; p = 0.0000), external barriers (t = −6.2862; p = 0.000) and job type 2 & 3. Job type two (t = −2.8464; p = 0.0045 is titled Engineer/Operator. Job type three (t = −2.5730; p = 0.0103) is titled captain. The overall regression was significant (F = 24.06; p = 0.000). The Hypothesis is supported in the certain demographic variables do influence the stated use of Universal precautions and that as internal and external barriers are decreased, there is an increase in the stated use of Universal Precautions. ^ In summary, this study demonstrated that internal and external barriers have a significant impact on the stated use of Universal Precautions. Internal barriers are those factors within the individual that require an internal change (i.e., forgetfulness, freedom, perception of the urgency of the patient's needs etc.) and external barriers are things in the environment that can be altered (i.e., equipment design, availability of equipment, ease of use). These two model variables explained 23%–30% of the variance. ^