Usefulness of telemedicine-based heart failure monitoring according to 'eHealth literacy' domains: Insights from the iCOR randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The potential positive effect of electronic health (eHealth)-based heart failure (HF) monitoring remains uncertain mainly in the 'low literacy' or 'computer or digital illiterate' patients. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a telemedicine (TM)-based managed care solution across literacy levels and information and communications technology (ICT) skills. METHODS: We performed a sub-analysis on the basis of two literacy domains encompassed in the definition of 'eHealth literacy' to the HF-patients included in the 'insuficiència Cardíaca Optimització Remota' (iCOR) randomized study comparing TM vs. usual care (UC) in HF-patients. The primary study endpoint was the incidence of a non-fatal HF event after 6 months of inclusion. The event rates of primary and secondary study endpoints were calculated for each literacy domains and its combination. Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to evaluate the effect of 'eHealth literacy' dimensions, treatment group and the interaction term 'eHealth literacy' domains by treatment group on study endpoints. RESULTS: The beneficial effect of TM compared to UC strategy was consistent across all literacy domains (p-value for interaction 0.207 and 0.117 respectively). The risk of experiencing a primary event was significantly lower in patients that underwent allocation to the TM arm compared to UC in both clustered in the 'lower literacy' (p-value=0.001) and those allocated to the 'lower ICT skills' (p-value=0.001) subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Non-invasive eHealth-based HF monitoring tools are effective compared to UC in preventing HF events in the early post-discharge period, regardless of two 'eHealth literacy' domains ('traditional and computer literacy').

Immunomodulatory therapy, risk factors and outcomes of hospital-acquired bloodstream infection in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: a Spanish case-control matched multicentre study (BACTCOVID).

OBJECTIVES: The effect of the use of immunomodulatory drugs on the risk of developing hospital-acquired bloodstream infection (BSI) in patients with COVID-19 has not been specifically assessed. We aim to identify risk factors for, and outcomes of, BSI among hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: We performed a severity matched case-control study (1:1 ratio) nested in a large multicentre prospective cohort of hospitalized adults with COVID-19. Cases with BSI were identified from the cohort database. Controls were matched for age, sex and acute respiratory distress syndrome. A Cox proportional hazard ratio model was performed. RESULTS: Of 2005 patients, 100 (4.98%) presented 142 episodes of BSI, mainly caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci, Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Polymicrobial infection accounted for 23 episodes. The median time from admission to the first episode of BSI was 15 days (IQR 9-20), and the most frequent source was catheter-related infection. The characteristics of patients with and without BSI were similar, including the use of tocilizumab, corticosteroids, and combinations. In the multivariate analysis, the use of these immunomodulatory drugs was not associated with an increased risk of BSI. A Cox proportional hazard ratio (HR) model showed that after adjusting for the time factor, BSI was associated with a higher in-hospital mortality risk (HR 2.59; 1.65-4.07; p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Hospital-acquired BSI in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia was uncommon and the use of immunomodulatory drugs was not associated with its development. When adjusting for the time factor, BSI was associated with a higher mortality risk.