The impact of medical informatics on patient satisfaction: A USA-based literature review

PurposePatient satisfaction is increasingly recognized as an important component of quality. The expansion of health information technologies (HIT) might have an impact on patient satisfaction – either positively or negatively. We conducted a literature review to explore the impact of these technologies on patient satisfaction.MethodsThe database of PubMed was searched from inception through May 2010, using the MeSH terms “Medical Informatics” and “Patient Satisfaction”. We included all original interventional studies regardless of their study design that were published in English and were evaluating HIT impact on patient satisfaction. Studies were categorized by technology type according to the American Medical Informatics Association framework and by study design. The major outcome of interest was the HIT impact on patient satisfaction.ResultsOf 1293 citations reviewed, 56 studies met our inclusion criteria. Design of these studies included mostly randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 20, 36%), cross-sectional surveys (n = 17, 30%), and a pre and post studies (n = 14, 25%). Overall, 54% (n = 30) of the studies demonstrated a positive effect of HIT on patient satisfaction, 34% (n = 19) failed to show any effect, 11% (n = 6) had inconclusive results, and 2% (n = 1) revealed a negative effect. Of the 20 RCTs, 40% (n = 8) showed a positive effect of HIT on patient satisfaction, 50% (n = 10) failed to show any effect, and 10% (2) had inconclusive results.ConclusionsAnalysis suggested that while there is some evidence that HIT improves patient satisfaction, studies in this literature review, and in particularly RCTs, were not consistent in their findings. Although HIT may be a promising tool to improve patient satisfaction, more well-designed research studies are needed in order to get a better understanding of this domain and accordingly find new opportunities to improve quality of care.     

Use of 16S rRNA gene profiling by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis to compare bacterial communities in sputum and mouthwash samples from patients with cystic fibrosis

The bacterial communities present in the oral cavity and the lungs of 19 adult cystic fibrosis (CF) patients were compared by using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of 16S rRNA gene PCR products amplified from nucleic acids extracted directly from bacteria in clinical samples. Sputum samples were not found to be subject to profound contamination by oral cavity bacteria. Evidence of colonization of the CF lung by certain oral bacterial species was found.     

Activity of voriconazole, itraconazole, fluconazole and amphotericin B in vitro against 1763 yeasts from 472 patients in the voriconazole phase III clinical studies

The susceptibility of 1763 yeast isolates (from 22 species and seven genera) was tested using Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute M27-A2 microdilution methodology. Candida spp. predominated (97.1%), mainly C. albicans (51.4%), C. glabrata (16.4%) and C. tropicalis (13.7%), followed by Trichosporon spp. (1.1%) and Cryptococcus neoformans (1.0%). Most isolates came from blood/catheters (72.0%) or the oesophagus/oropharynx (11.3%). The voriconazole, itraconazole, fluconazole and amphotericin B MIC90 values (minimum inhibitory concentration for 90% of the isolates) for all isolates were 1.0, 2.0, 64 and 1.0 microg/mL, respectively. Voriconazole MICs correlated with those for fluconazole (r = 0.91) and itraconazole (r = 0.90). Only 109 isolates (6.2%) had voriconazole MICs > or = 4.0 microg/mL; all were C. albicans, C. glabrata or C. tropicalis resistant to itraconazole (and most to fluconazole). Isolates from 22 patients with amphotericin MICs > or = 2.0 microg/mL (range 2.0-16.0 microg/mL) were also cross-resistant to one or more of the triazoles. Patients (n = 34) with voriconazole-resistant isolates showed a 56% response to voriconazole therapy, and those patients (n = 261) with susceptible isolates showed a 71% response. Twenty-three voriconazole-treated patients had baseline resistant isolates, in eight patients voriconazole resistance developed during therapy and in three patients a different resistant species arose during therapy. Thus, voriconazole MICs correlate with those of fluconazole and itraconazole and may predict clinical outcome.