Inpatient telemedicine and new models of care during COVID-19: hospital design strategies to enhance patient and staff safety

The challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic have led to the development of new hospital design strategies and models of care. To enhance staff safety while preserving patient safety and quality of care, hospitals have created a new model of remote inpatient care using telemedicine technologies. The design of the COVID-19 units divided the space into contaminated and clean zones and integrated a control room with audio-visual technologies to remotely supervise, communicate, and support the care being provided in the contaminated zone. The research is based on semi-structured interviews and observations of care processes that implemented a new model of inpatient telemedicine at Sheba Medical Center in Israel in different COVID-19 units, including an intensive care unit (ICU) and internal medicine unit (IMU). The study examines the impact of the diverse design layouts of the different units associated with the implementation of digital technologies for remote care on patient and staff safety. The results demonstrate the challenges and opportunities of integrating inpatient telemedicine for critical and intermediate care to enhance patient and staff safety. We contribute insights into the design of hospital units to support new models of remote care and suggest implications for Evidence-based Design (EBD), which will guide much needed future research

Which outcomes are most important to measure in patients with COVID-19 and how and when should these be measured? Development of an international standard set of outcomes measures for clinical use in patients with COVID-19: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) COVID-19 Working Group.

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality with the consequences expected to be felt for many years. Significant variation exists in the care even of similar patients with COVID-19, including treatment practices within and between institutions. Outcome measures vary among clinical trials on the same therapies. Understanding which therapies are of most value is not possible unless consensus can be reached on which outcomes are most important to measure. Furthermore, consensus on the most important outcomes may enable patients to monitor and track their care, and may help providers to improve the care they offer through quality improvement. To develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes for clinical care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled a working group (WG) of 28 volunteers, including health professionals, patients and patient representatives. Design: A list of outcomes important to patients and professionals was generated from a systematic review of the published literature using the MEDLINE database, from review of outcomes being measured in ongoing clinical trials, from a survey distributed to patients and patient networks, and from previously published ICHOM standard sets in other disease areas. Using an online-modified Delphi process, the WG selected outcomes of greatest importance. Results: The outcomes considered by the WG to be most important were selected and categorised into five domains: (1) functional status and quality of life, (2) mental functioning, (3) social functioning, (4) clinical outcomes and (5) symptoms. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, clinical factors and treatment-related factors. Conclusion: Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of care to patients with COVID-19. Their consistent definition and collection could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research.</p

Erectile dysfunction, physical activity and metabolic syndrome: differences in markers of atherosclerosis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Erectile dysfunction (ED), impaired arterial elasticity, elevated resting heart rate as well as increased levels of oxidized LDL and fibrinogen associate with future cardiovascular events. Physical activity is crucial in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD), while metabolic syndrome (MetS) comprises an increased risk for CVD events. The aim of this study was to assess whether markers of subclinical atherosclerosis are associated with the presence of ED and MetS, and whether physical activity is protective of ED.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>57 MetS (51.3 ± 8.0 years) and 48 physically active (PhA) (51.1 ± 8.1 years) subjects participated in the study. ED was assessed by the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire, arterial elasticity by a radial artery tonometer (HDI/PulseWave™ CR-2000) and circulating oxLDL by a capture ELISA immunoassay. Fibrinogen and lipids were assessed by validated methods. The calculation of mean daily energy expenditure of physical exercise was based on a structured questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>ED was more often present among MetS compared to PhA subjects, 63.2% and 27.1%, respectively (p < 0.001). Regular physical exercise at the level of > 400 kcal/day was protective of ED (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.017-0.778, p = 0.027), whereas increased fibrinogen (OR 4.67, 95% CI 1.171-18.627, p = 0.029) and elevated resting heart rate (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.003-1.138, p = 0.04) were independently associated with the presence of ED. In addition, large arterial elasticity (ml/mmHgx10) was lower among MetS compared to PhA subjects (16.6 ± 4.0 <it>vs</it>. 19.6 ± 4.2, p < 0.001), as well as among ED compared to non-ED subjects (16.7 ± 4.6 <it>vs</it>. 19.0 ± 3.9, p = 0.008). Fibrinogen and resting heart rate were highest and large arterial elasticity lowest among subjects with both MetS and ED.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Markers of subclinical atherosclerosis associated with the presence of ED and were most evident among subjects with both MetS and ED. Thus, especially MetS patients presenting with ED should be considered at high risk for CVD events. Physical activity, on its part, seems to be protective of ED.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01119404">NCT01119404</a></p

Which outcomes are most important to measure in patients with COVID-19 and how and when should these be measured? Development of an international standard set of outcomes measures for clinical use in patients with COVID-19: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) COVID-19 Working Group

Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality with the consequences expected to be felt for many years. Significant variation exists in the care even of similar patients with COVID-19, including treatment practices within and between institutions. Outcome measures vary among clinical trials on the same therapies. Understanding which therapies are of most value is not possible unless consensus can be reached on which outcomes are most important to measure. Furthermore, consensus on the most important outcomes may enable patients to monitor and track their care, and may help providers to improve the care they offer through quality improvement. To develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes for clinical care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled a working group (WG) of 28 volunteers, including health professionals, patients and patient representatives. Design: A list of outcomes important to patients and professionals was generated from a systematic review of the published literature using the MEDLINE database, from review of outcomes being measured in ongoing clinical trials, from a survey distributed to patients and patient networks, and from previously published ICHOM standard sets in other disease areas. Using an online-modified Delphi process, the WG selected outcomes of greatest importance. Results: The outcomes considered by the WG to be most important were selected and categorised into five domains: (1) functional status and quality of life, (2) mental functioning, (3) social functioning, (4) clinical outcomes and (5) symptoms. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, clinical factors and treatment-related factors. Conclusion: Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of care to patients with COVID-19. Their consistent definition and collection could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research

Baseline characteristics of patients in the reduction of events with darbepoetin alfa in heart failure trial (RED-HF)

&lt;p&gt;Aims: This report describes the baseline characteristics of patients in the Reduction of Events with Darbepoetin alfa in Heart Failure trial (RED-HF) which is testing the hypothesis that anaemia correction with darbepoetin alfa will reduce the composite endpoint of death from any cause or hospital admission for worsening heart failure, and improve other outcomes.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Methods and results: Key demographic, clinical, and laboratory findings, along with baseline treatment, are reported and compared with those of patients in other recent clinical trials in heart failure. Compared with other recent trials, RED-HF enrolled more elderly [mean age 70 (SD 11.4) years], female (41%), and black (9%) patients. RED-HF patients more often had diabetes (46%) and renal impairment (72% had an estimated glomerular filtration rate &#60;60 mL/min/1.73 m2). Patients in RED-HF had heart failure of longer duration [5.3 (5.4) years], worse NYHA class (35% II, 63% III, and 2% IV), and more signs of congestion. Mean EF was 30% (6.8%). RED-HF patients were well treated at randomization, and pharmacological therapy at baseline was broadly similar to that of other recent trials, taking account of study-specific inclusion/exclusion criteria. Median (interquartile range) haemoglobin at baseline was 112 (106–117) g/L.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Conclusion: The anaemic patients enrolled in RED-HF were older, moderately to markedly symptomatic, and had extensive co-morbidity.&lt;/p&gt