Experiences, barriers and expectations regarding current patient monitoring systems among ICU nurses in a University Hospital in Lebanon: a qualitative study

PurposeThe aim of the study is to assess the experiences, barriers, and expectations regarding current patient monitoring systems among intensive care unit nurses at one university hospital.MethodsA qualitative exploratory study approach was adopted to test the research questions.ResultsIntensive care unit personnel placed a high value on practical criteria such as user friendliness and visualization while assessing the present monitoring system. Poor alarm handling was recognized as possible patient safety hazards. The necessity of high accessibility was highlighted once again for a prospective system; wireless, noninvasive, and interoperability of monitoring devices were requested; and smart phones for distant patient monitoring and alert management improvement were required.ConclusionCore comments from ICU personnel are included in this qualitative research on patient monitoring. All national healthcare involved parties must focus more on user-derived insights to ensure a speedy and effective introduction of digital health technologies in the ICU. The findings from the alarm control or mobile device studies might be utilized to train ICU personnel to use new technology, minimize alarm fatigue, increase medical device accessibility, and develop interoperability standards in critical care practice

Predictors of the efficacy of His bundle pacing in patients with a prolonged PR interval: A stratified analysis of the HOPE‐HF randomized controlled trial

Aims: The randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled HOPE‐HF trial assessed the benefit of atrio‐ventricular (AV) delay optimization delivered using His bundle pacing. It recruited patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%, PR interval ≥200 ms, and baseline QRS ≤140 ms or right bundle branch block. Overall, there was no significant increase in peak oxygen uptake (VO2max) but there was significant improvement in heart failure specific quality of life. In this pre‐specified secondary analysis, we evaluated the impact of baseline PR interval, echocardiographic E‐A fusion, and the magnitude of acute high‐precision haemodynamic response to pacing, on outcomes. Methods and results: All 167 randomized participants underwent measurement of PR interval, acute haemodynamic response at optimized AV delay, and assessment of presence of E‐A fusion. We tested the impact of these baseline parameters using a Bayesian ordinal model on VO2max, quality of life and activity measures. There was strong evidence of a beneficial interaction between the baseline acute haemodynamic response and the blinded benefit of pacing for VO2 (Pr 99.9%), Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLWHF) (Pr 99.8%), MLWHF physical limitation score (Pr 98.9%), EQ‐5D visual analogue scale (Pr 99.6%), and exercise time (Pr 99.4%). The baseline PR interval and the presence of baseline E‐A fusion did not have this reliable ability to predict the clinical benefit of pacing over placebo across multiple endpoints. Conclusions: In the HOPE‐HF trial, the acute haemodynamic response to pacing reliably identified patients who obtained clinical benefit. Patients with a long PR interval (≥200 ms) and left ventricular impairment who obtained acute haemodynamic improvement with AV‐optimized His bundle pacing were likely to obtain clinical benefit, consistent across multiple endpoints. Importantly, this gradation can be reliably tested for before randomization, but does require high‐precision AV‐optimized haemodynamic assessment to be performed

Effects of haemodynamically atrio‐ventricular optimized His‐pacing on heart failure symptoms and exercise capacity: the His Optimized Pacing Evaluated for Heart Failure (HOPE‐HF) randomised, double‐blind, cross‐over trial

Aims: Excessive prolongation of PR interval impairs coupling of AV contraction, which reduces left ventricular pre-load and stroke volume, and worsens symptoms. His-bundle pacing allows AV-delay shortening while maintaining normal ventricular activation. HOPE-HF evaluated whether AV-optimized His pacing is preferable to no-pacing, in double-blind cross-over fashion, in patients with heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40%, PR interval ≥200ms and either QRS ≤140ms or right BBB. Methods and Results: Patients had atrial and His-bundle leads implanted (and an ICD lead if clinically indicated) and were randomized, to 6-months of pacing and 6-months of no-pacing utilizing a cross-over design. The primary outcome was peak oxygen uptake during symptom-limited exercise. Quality of life, LVEF and patients’ holistic symptomatic preference between arms were secondary outcomes. 167 patients were randomized: 90% men, 69±10 years, QRS duration 124±26ms, PR interval 249±59ms, LVEF 33±9%. Neither peak VO2 (+0.25 ml/min/kg, 95% CI -0.23 to +0.73, p=0.3) nor LVEF (+0.5%, 95% CI -0.7 to 1.6, p=0.4) changed with pacing but Minnesota Living with Heart Failure quality of life improved significantly (-3.7, 95% CI -7.1 to -0.3, p=0.03). 76% of patients preferred His-bundle pacing-on and 24% pacing-off (p<0.0001). Conclusion: His-bundle pacing did not increase peak oxygen uptake but, under double-blind conditions, significantly improved quality of life and was symptomatically preferred by the clear majority of patients. Ventricular pacing delivered via the His bundle did not adversely impact ventricular function during the 6 months

Global economic burden of unmet surgical need for appendicitis

Background There is a substantial gap in provision of adequate surgical care in many low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to identify the economic burden of unmet surgical need for the common condition of appendicitis. Methods Data on the incidence of appendicitis from 170 countries and two different approaches were used to estimate numbers of patients who do not receive surgery: as a fixed proportion of the total unmet surgical need per country (approach 1); and based on country income status (approach 2). Indirect costs with current levels of access and local quality, and those if quality were at the standards of high-income countries, were estimated. A human capital approach was applied, focusing on the economic burden resulting from premature death and absenteeism. Results Excess mortality was 4185 per 100 000 cases of appendicitis using approach 1 and 3448 per 100 000 using approach 2. The economic burden of continuing current levels of access and local quality was US $92 492 million using approach 1 and$73 141 million using approach 2. The economic burden of not providing surgical care to the standards of high-income countries was $95 004 million using approach 1 and$75 666 million using approach 2. The largest share of these costs resulted from premature death (97.7 per cent) and lack of access (97.0 per cent) in contrast to lack of quality. Conclusion For a comparatively non-complex emergency condition such as appendicitis, increasing access to care should be prioritized. Although improving quality of care should not be neglected, increasing provision of care at current standards could reduce societal costs substantially

Global economic burden of unmet surgical need for appendicitis

Background There is a substantial gap in provision of adequate surgical care in many low- and middle-income countries. This study aimed to identify the economic burden of unmet surgical need for the common condition of appendicitis. Methods Data on the incidence of appendicitis from 170 countries and two different approaches were used to estimate numbers of patients who do not receive surgery: as a fixed proportion of the total unmet surgical need per country (approach 1); and based on country income status (approach 2). Indirect costs with current levels of access and local quality, and those if quality were at the standards of high-income countries, were estimated. A human capital approach was applied, focusing on the economic burden resulting from premature death and absenteeism. Results Excess mortality was 4185 per 100 000 cases of appendicitis using approach 1 and 3448 per 100 000 using approach 2. The economic burden of continuing current levels of access and local quality was US $92 492 million using approach 1 and$73 141 million using approach 2. The economic burden of not providing surgical care to the standards of high-income countries was $95 004 million using approach 1 and$75 666 million using approach 2. The largest share of these costs resulted from premature death (97.7 per cent) and lack of access (97.0 per cent) in contrast to lack of quality. Conclusion For a comparatively non-complex emergency condition such as appendicitis, increasing access to care should be prioritized. Although improving quality of care should not be neglected, increasing provision of care at current standards could reduce societal costs substantially