Citations

AbstractObjective Video recording and video recognition (VR) with computer vision have become widely used in many aspects of modern life. Hospitals have employed VR technology for security purposes, however, despite the growing number of studies showing the feasibility of VR software for physiologic monitoring or detection of patient movement, its use in the intensive care unit (ICU) in real-time is sparse and the perception of this novel technology is unknown. The objective of this study is to understand the attitudes of providers, patients, and patient's families toward using VR in the ICU.Design A 10-question survey instrument was used and distributed into two groups of participants: clinicians (MDs, advance practice providers, registered nurses), patients and families (adult patients and patients' relatives). Questions were specifically worded and section for free text-comments created to elicit respondents' thoughts and attitudes on potential issues and barriers toward implementation of VR in the ICU.Setting The survey was conducted at Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and Florida.Results A total of 233 clinicians' and 50 patients' surveys were collected. Both cohorts favored VR under specific circumstances (e.g., invasive intervention and diagnostic manipulation). Acceptable reasons for VR usage according to clinicians were anticipated positive impact on patient safety (70%), and diagnostic suggestions and decision support (51%). A minority of providers was concerned that artificial intelligence (AI) would replace their job (14%) or erode professional skills (28%). The potential use of VR in lawsuits (81% clinicians) and privacy breaches (59% patients) were major areas of concern. Further identified barriers were lack of trust for AI, deterioration of the patient–clinician rapport. Patients agreed with VR unless it does not reduce nursing care or record sensitive scenarios.Conclusion The survey provides valuable information on the acceptance of VR cameras in the critical care setting including an overview of real concerns and attitudes toward the use of VR technology in the ICU.

Abstract Introduction. COVID-19 presents a special challenge to the kidney transplant population. Methods. A systematic review of articles that examined COVID-19 in kidney transplant recipients was performed. Patients’ demographics, clinical, laboratory and radiological presentations, immunosuppression modification, and COVID-19 specific management were abstracted and analyzed. COVID-19 severity was classified into mild, moderate, and severe. Disease outcome was classified by whether the patient was discharged, still hospitalized, or died. Results. 44 articles reporting individual data and 13 articles reporting aggregated data on 149 and 561 kidney transplant recipients respectively with COVID-19 from Asia, Europe and America fulfilled all inclusion and exclusion criteria. Among studies reporting case specific data, 76% of cases had severe disease. Compared to patients with mild/moderate disease, patients with severe disease had higher CRP, LDH, Ferritin, D-dimer and were more likely to have bilateral lung involvement at presentation and longer time since transplantation (P < 0.05 for all). Recipients’ age, gender and comorbidities did not impact disease severity. Patients with severe disease had a more aggressive CNI reduction and more antiviral medications utilization. Outcome was reported on 145 cases, of those 34 (23%) died all with severe disease. Longer duration from transplant to disease diagnosis, hypoxia and higher LDH were associated with mortality (P < 0.05). Different immunosuppression reduction strategies, high dose parenteral corticosteroids use and various antiviral combinations did not demonstrate survival advantage. Similar finding was observed for studies reporting aggregated data. Conclusion. COVID-19 in kidney transplant patients is associated with high rate of disease severity and fatality. Higher LDH and longer time since transplantation predicted both disease severity and mortality. None of the COVID-19 specific treatment correlated with, or improved disease outcome in kidney transplant recipients.

Objective The aim of the study was to investigate the association between hospitals’ nursing excellence accreditation and patient safety performance—measured by the Hospital-Acquired Conditions Reduction Program (HACRP). Methods We linked data from the American Nursing Credentialing Center Magnet Recognition Program, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services HACRP, and the American Hospital Association annual survey from 2014 to 2016. We constrained the analysis to hospitals participating in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ HACRP and deployed propensity score matching models to calculate the coefficients for our HACRP patient safety measures. These measures consisted of (a) patient safety indicator 90, (b) hospital-associated infection measures, and (c) total HAC scores. In addition, we used propensity score matching to assess HACRP scores between hospitals achieving Magnet recognition in the past 2 versus longer and within the past 5 years versus longer. Results Our primary findings indicate that Magnet hospitals have an increased likelihood of experiencing lower patient safety indicator 90 scores, higher catheter-associated urinary tract infection and surgical site infection scores, and no different total HAC scores. Finally, when examining the impact of Magnet tenure, our analysis revealed that there were no differences in Magnet tenure. Conclusions Results indicate that the processes, procedures, and educational aspects associated with Magnet recognition seem to provide important improvements associated with care that is controlled by nursing practice. However, because these improvements do not differ when comparing total HAC scores nor Magnet hospitals with different tenure, there are likely opportunities for Magnet hospitals to continue process improvements focused on HACRP scores.