Objective. To compare safety climate between diverse U.S. hospitals and Veterans Health Administration (VA) hospitals, and to explore the factors influencing climate in each setting.

Data Sources. Primary data from surveys of hospital personnel; secondary data from the American Hospital Association's 2004 Annual Survey of Hospitals.

Study Design. Cross-sectional study of 69 U.S. and 30 VA hospitals.

Data Collection. For each sample, hierarchical linear models used safety-climate scores as the dependent variable and respondent and facility characteristics as independent variables. Regression-based Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition examined differences in effects of model characteristics on safety climate between the U.S. and VA samples.

Principal Findings. The range in safety climate among U.S. and VA hospitals overlapped substantially. Characteristics of individuals influenced safety climate consistently across settings. Working in southern and urban facilities corresponded with worse safety climate among VA employees and better safety climate in the U.S. sample. Decomposition results predicted 1.4 percentage points better safety climate in U.S. than in VA hospitals: −0.77 attributable to sample-characteristic differences and 2.2 due to differential effects of sample characteristics.

Conclusions. Results suggest that safety climate is linked more to efforts of individual hospitals than to participation in a nationally integrated system or measured characteristics of workers and facilities.

Estimating the potential health benefits and expenditures of a partially effective HIV vaccine is an important consideration in the debate about whether HIV vaccine research should continue. We developed an epidemic model to estimate HIV prevalence, new infections, and the cost-effectiveness of vaccination strategies in the U.S. Vaccines with modest efficacy could prevent 300,000-700,000 HIV infections and save $30 billion in healthcare expenditures over 20 years. Targeted vaccination of high-risk individuals is economically efficient, but difficulty in reaching these groups may mitigate these benefits. Universal vaccination is cost-effective for vaccines with 50% efficacy and price similar to other infectious disease vaccines.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence-based surgery is predicated on the quality of published literature. We measured the quality of surgery manuscripts selected by peer review and identified predictors of excellence.

METHODS: One hundred twenty clinical surgery manuscripts were randomly selected from 1998 in 5 eminent peer-reviewed surgery and medical journals. Manuscripts were blinded for author, institution, and journal of origin. Four surgeons and 4 methodologists evaluated the quality using novel instruments based on subject selection, study protocol, statistical analysis/inference, intervention description, outcome assessments, and results presentation. Predictors of quality and impact factor were identified using bivariate and multivariate regression.

RESULTS: Oncology was the most common subject (26%), followed by general surgery/gastrointestinal (24%). The average number of study subjects was 417; the majority of manuscripts were American (53%), from a single institution (59%). Eighteen percent had a statistician author. Mean number of citations was 128. Surgery manuscripts from medical, compared with surgery journals, had better total quality scores (3.8 vs. 5.2, P < 0.001). They had more subjects and were more likely to have a statistician as coauthor (43% vs. 10%, P < 0.001), multi-institutional, international collaboration (30% vs. 8%, P < 0.001), and higher citation index (mean: 350 vs. 54, P < 0.001). They were more often foreign (70% vs. 40%, P < 0.001). Independent predictors of quality were having a statistician coauthor, study funding, European origin, and more study subjects. Quality assessment using our instruments predicted the number of citations after 10 years (P < 0.01), along with having a statistician coauthor, international multi-institutional collaboration, and more subjects.

CONCLUSION: The quality of surgery manuscripts can be improved by including a statistician as coauthor, with efforts directed toward implementing multi-institutional/interdisciplinary trials. Peer-review across journals can be standardized through the use of instruments measuring methodologic and clinical quality.

Clinical research presents health care providers with information on the natural history and clinical presentations of disease as well as diagnostic and treatment options. Consumers, patients, and caregivers also require this information to decide how to evaluate and treat their conditions. All too often, the information necessary to inform these medical decisions is incomplete or unavailable, resulting in more than half of the treatments delivered today lacking clear evidence of effectiveness.

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) identifies what works best for which patients under what circumstances. Congress, in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, tasked the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to recommend national priorities for research questions to be addressed by CER and supported by ARRA funds. In its 2009 report, Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research, the authoring committee establishes a working definition of CER, develops a priority list of research topics to be undertaken with ARRA funding using broad stakeholder input, and identifies the necessary requirements to support a robust and sustainable CER enterprise. The full list of priorities and recommendations can be found in the below report brief.

The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF), along with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriate use review of common clinical scenarios where cardiac radionuclide imaging (RNI) is frequently considered. This document is a revision of the original Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (SPECT MPI) Appropriateness Criteria,1 published 4 years earlier, written to reect changes in test utilization and new clinical data, and to clarify RNI use where omissions or lack of clarity existed in the original criteria. This is in keeping with the commitment to revise and rene appropriate use criteria (AUC) on a frequent basis. The indications for this review were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines. Sixty-seven clinical scenarios were developed by a writing group and scored by a separate technical panel on a scale of 1 to 9 to designate appropriate. In general, use of cardiac RNI for diagnosis and risk assessment in intermediate- and high-risk patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was viewed favorably, while testing in low-risk patients, routine repeat testing, and general screening in certain clinical scenarios were viewed less favorably. Additionally, use for perioperative testing was found to be inappropriate except for high selected groups of patients. It is anticipated that these results will have a signicant impact on physician decision making, test performance, and reimbursement policy, and will help guide future research.

The patient was a 41 year-old Mexican American women who presented with a decrease in visual acuity along with periorbital and peripheral edema. She was diagnosed with bilateral serous retinal detachment and diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis. She improved considerably in hospital after treatment with corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVE: To examine parent concerns about development, learning, and behavior for young children of Mexican origin, and to identify whether these reports differ by families' citizenship/documentation status.

METHODS: Data come from the 2005 California Health Interview Survey, a population-based random-digit dial telephone survey of California's noninstitutionalized population. California Health Inerview Survey (CHIS) investigators completed interviews of 43 020 households with a total of 5856 children under age 6 years, of whom 1786 were reported being of Mexican origin. Developmental risk was measured by parent concerns elicited by the Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status. We used bivariate and multivariate analyses to examine associations between developmental risk and family citizenship/documentation status (parents are undocumented, at least one documented noncitizen parent, or both parents are US citizens) among children of Mexican origin and US-born non-Latino white children, after adjusting for age, income, parental education, and predominant household language.

RESULTS: In multivariate analyses, children of Mexican origin did not differ significantly from US-born white children in developmental risk (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.88-1.42). In subgroup analyses, children of Mexican origin with undocumented parents had higher odds of developmental risk (odds ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.00-2.33) than non-Latino white children whose parents were citizens, after adjusting for confounders.

CONCLUSIONS: Mexican children with undocumented parents have greater parent-reported developmental risk than Mexican and white children whose parents are US citizens or otherwise legally documented. More research is needed to understand the roles of immigration stress and home environments on the developmental risks of children in households with undocumented parents.

CONTEXT: Allowing nonelectrophysiologists to perform implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) procedures is controversial. However, it is not known whether outcomes of ICD implantation vary by physician specialty.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of implanting physician certification with outcomes following ICD implantation.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective cohort study using cases submitted to the ICD Registry performed between January 2006 and June 2007. Patients were grouped by the certification status of the implanting physician into mutually exclusive categories: electrophysiologists, nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, thoracic surgeons, and other specialists. Hierarchical logistic regression models were developed to determine the independent association of physician certification with outcomes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital procedural complication rates and the proportion of patients meeting criteria for a defibrillator with cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT-D) who received that device.

RESULTS: Of 111,293 ICD implantations included in the analysis, 78,857 (70.9%) were performed by electrophysiologists, 24,399 (21.9%) by nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 1862 (1.7%) by thoracic surgeons, and 6175 (5.5%) by other specialists. Compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by electrophysiologists, patients whose ICD was implanted by either nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists or thoracic surgeons were at increased risk of complications in both unadjusted (electrophysiologists, 3.5% [2743/78,857]; nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 4.0% [970/24,399]; thoracic surgeons, 5.8% [108/1862]; P < .001) and adjusted analyses (relative risk [RR] for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 1.11 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.01-1.21]; RR for thoracic surgeons, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.15-1.79]). Among 35,841 patients who met criteria for CRT-D, those whose ICD was implanted by physicians other than electrophysiologists were significantly less likely to receive a CRT-D device compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by an electrophysiologist in both unadjusted (electrophysiologists, 83.1% [21 303/25,635]; nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 75.8% [5950/7849]; thoracic surgeons, 57.8% [269/465]; other specialists, 74.8% [1416/1892]; P < .001) and adjusted analyses (RR for nonelectrophysiologist cardiologists, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.91-0.95]; RR for thoracic surgeons, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74-0.88]; RR for other specialists, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.94-0.99]).

CONCLUSIONS: In this registry, nonelectrophysiologists implanted 29% of ICDs. Overall, implantations by a nonelectrophysiologist were associated with a higher risk of procedural complications and lower likelihood of receiving a CRT-D device when indicated compared with patients whose ICD was implanted by an electrophysiologist.

There have been many new developments in the broad fields of epidemiology, health services research (HSR), and outcomes research during the past year, many more than can be discussed in detail in this review. We selected articles published since the last article in this series, covering roughly the period April 2007 through March 2008, that examined important issues or advanced research methods in the field.

STUDY DESIGN: Clinical practice guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations on use of interventional diagnostic tests and therapies, surgeries, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation for low back pain of any duration, with or without leg pain.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Management of patients with persistent and disabling low back pain remains a clinical challenge. A number of interventional diagnostic tests and therapies and surgery are available and their use is increasing, but in some cases their utility remains uncertain or controversial. Interdisciplinary rehabilitation has also been proposed as a potentially effective noninvasive intervention for persistent and disabling low back pain.

METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel was convened by the American Pain Society. Its recommendations were based on a systematic review that focused on evidence from randomized controlled trials. Recommendations were graded using methods adapted from the US Preventive Services Task Force and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Working Group.

RESULTS: Investigators reviewed 3348 abstracts. A total of 161 randomized trials were deemed relevant to the recommendations in this guideline. The panel developed a total of 8 recommendations.

CONCLUSION: Recommendations on use of interventional diagnostic tests and therapies, surgery, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation are presented. Due to important trade-offs between potential benefits, harms, costs, and burdens of alternative therapies, shared decision-making is an important component of a number of the recommendations.