A Smart System for Remote Monitoring of Patients in Palliative Care (HumanITcare Platform): Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Due to the complexities of advanced illnesses and their treatments, it can be difficult for patients in palliative care to maintain their quality of life. Telemedicine interventions in chronic disease management engage patients in their care, provide continuous follow-up by their health care providers, identify symptoms earlier, and allow a quick response to illness-related decline. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to detail and reflect on the design of an app and evaluate its feasibility to monitor the clinical situation of patients with advanced illnesses. METHODS: This study used a mixed methods design using qualitative methods to inform app development and design and quantitative methods for data collection and analysis of patient evaluations. Palliative care units in 2 Spanish university hospitals (Nuestra Señora de la Candelaria in Santa Cruz de Tenerife and University Hospital Complex of Ferrol in A Coruña) carried out a literature review, designed the study protocol, and obtained approval from the Ethics Committee from June to December 2020. In addition, focus group meetings were held, and the design and technical development of the app were elaborated on and subsequently presented in the participating palliative care units. From January to March 2021, the app was made public on the App Store and Play Store, and a pilot study with patients was carried out in April to September 2021. RESULTS: Six focus group meetings were held that included doctors, nurses, app developers, technology consultants, and sponsors. In addition, the technology consultants presented their results 3 times in the participating palliative care units to obtain feedback. After the app's final design, it was possible to publish it on the usual servers and begin its evaluation in patients (n=60, median age 72 years). Sixty percent (n=36) of the participants were women and 40% (n=24) were men. The most prevalent advanced pathology was cancer (n=46, 76%), followed by other diseases (n=7, 12%) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (n=5, 8%). Seventy percent (n=42) of the patients were already in follow-up prior to the start of the study, while 30% (n=18) were included at the start of their follow-up. The information in the app was collected and entered by relatives or caregivers in 60% (n=36) of the cases. The median follow-up was 52 (IQR 14-104) days. In all, 69% (n=41) had a follow-up >30 days (10 were deceased and 9 were missing data). The use of the different sections of the app ranged from 37% (n=22) for the glycemic record to 90% (n=54) for the constipation scale). Patients and caregivers were delighted with its ease of use and usefulness. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating an intelligent remote patient monitoring system in clinical practice for patients in palliative care can improve access to health services and provide more information to professionals.

Improving the Understanding and Managing of the Quality of Life of Patients With Lung Cancer With Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) are essential to clinical practice and research. The growth of eHealth technologies has provided unprecedented opportunities to collect information systematically through ePROMs. Although they are widely used in scientific research, more evidence is needed to determine their use and implementation in daily clinical practice. For example, when diagnosed, patients with lung cancer are at an advanced stage of the disease. This entails tremendous burden because of high mortality and losses in the different dimensions of the human being. In this case, monitoring symptoms and other outcomes help improve the patient's quality of life. OBJECTIVE: ePROMs offered unprecedented opportunities to collect information systematically. Our goal was to demonstrate that ePROMs are more useful in controlling patient symptoms, lung cancer, and overall survival than their alternatives, such as nonelectronic PROMs. METHODS: This exploratory review considered articles published between 2017 and 2022 identified through searches of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. We found 5097 articles; after removing the duplicates, we reduced them to 3315. After reading the summary, we were left with 56. Finally, after applying the exclusion criteria, we reviewed 12. The 5-step framework by Arksey and O'Malley was used to refine the initial search results with the following research questions: Do ePROMs help physician-patient communication? To what extent do they improve decision-making? Are institutions and their digitization policies barriers to or facilitators of this process? and What else is needed for routine implementation? RESULTS: This review included 12 articles. We found that ePROMs are an integrative and facilitative communication tool, highlighting their importance in the relationship between palliative care and medical oncology. ePROMs help assess patient symptoms and functionality more accurately and facilitate clinical decision-making. In addition, it allows for more precise predictions of overall patient survival and the adverse effects of their treatments. The main institutional obstacles are the initial investment, which can be costly, and the data protection policy. However, enablers included better funding through the development of telemedicine, support from institutional leaders to overcome resistance to change, and transparent policies to ensure the safe and secure use of ePROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Routine collection of remote ePROMs is an effective and valuable strategy for providing real-time clinical feedback. In addition, it provides satisfaction to patients and professionals. Optimizing ePROMs in patients with lung cancer leads to a more accurate view of health outcomes and ensures quality patient follow-up. It also allows us to stratify patients based on their morbidity, creating specific follow-ups for their needs. However, data privacy and security are concerns when using ePROMs to ensure compliance with local entities. At least four barriers were identified: cost, complex programming within health systems, safety, and social and health literacy.

Determinants in Stakeholder Opinions About Telemedicine in Palliative Care: A Scoping Review.

Background: The use of Telemedicine is growing, and its application in palliative medicine may facilitate patient care and be a solution to the growing pressures on hospital services in these pandemic times. Aim: The main objective of this review is to describe the current use of telemedicine in palliative care and assess stakeholders' views on the initiatives that have been implemented worldwide regarding digital service standards. Materials and Methods: Articles published between 2010 and 2020 were identified through PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Google Scholar searches. We used Arksey and O'Malley's five-step framework to delimit and guide the initial search results. Results: The search identified 291 articles, of which 16 are included in this review. The selected studies were sufficiently detailed to allow their evaluation and answer our research questions. In addition, Telemedicine was used for patient and caregiver support and professional education. Conclusions: The use of Telemedicine for patient and caregiver support and professional education. Telemedicine empowers patients and increases their functional capacity. The imperative need to dictate implementation policies and ethical issues are some of the pending questions. In countries where a Telemedicine project has been initiated, it is valued as a good option for continuity of care, but all those involved would like face-to-face contact first, even if it is not mandatory.

Telehealth Opportunities in the COVID-19 Pandemic Early Days: What Happened, Did Not Happen, Should Have Happened, and Must Happen in the Near Future?

The objective of this communication is to offer a better understanding of the value of telemedicine in health care, particularly its role in creating opportunities for continuity of care to patients in a complex and novel setting as were the circumstances of the early COVID-19 pandemic times. Crisis time is also a time for opportunities. With regard to telehealth, all players (providers, staff, and patients) should be informed about its benefits and should also become familiar with the use of the various telehealth options and this will only be achieved through large information campaigns necessary enriched by local teaching and training programs in both public and private institutions. The final aim is to launch the debate and foster ideas useful throughout the pandemic. This article covers the experiences of physicians as well as health professionals in the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal), to provide a clearer idea of what has happened and how we can improve it with the possibilities provided by telemedicine, while at the same time to put in evidence that public health systems need to be rethought to provide solutions to situations such as that we are experiencing.

Telemedicine in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is a positive single-stranded RNA virus that can be immediately translated and integrated into the host cell with its own RNA messenger, facilitating replication inside the cell and infectivity. The rapid progression of the disease presents a real challenge for the whole world. As the usual capacity for citizen care is exceeded, health professionals and governments struggle. One of the most important strategies to reduce and mitigate the advance of the epidemic are social distance measures; this is where telemedicine can help, and provide support to the healthcare systems, especially in the areas of public health, prevention and clinical practices, just as it is doing in others sectors. Telemedicine connects the convenience, low cost, and ready accessibility of health-related information and communication using the Internet and associated technologies. Telemedicine during the coronavirus epidemic has been the doctors' first line of defense to slow the spread of the coronavirus, keeping social distancing and providing services by phone or videoconferencing for mild to focus personal care and limited supplies to the most urgent cases.

Trends in Scientific Reports on Cartilage Bioprinting: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Satisfactory therapeutic strategies for cartilaginous lesion repair do not yet exist. This creates a challenge for surgeons and biomedical engineers and leads them to investigate the role of bioprinting and tissue engineering as viable treatments through orthopedic surgery, plastic surgery, and otorhinolaryngology. Recent increases in related scientific literature suggest that bioprinted cartilage may develop into a viable solution. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this review were to (1) synthesize the scientific advances published to date, (2) identify unresolved technical problems regarding human application, and (3) identify more effective ways for the scientific community to transfer their findings to clinicians. METHODS: This scoping review considered articles published between 2009 and 2019 that were identified through searching PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Arksey and O'Malley's five-step framework was used to delimit and direct the initial search results, from which we established the following research questions: (1) What do authors of current research say about human application? (2) What necessary technical improvements are identified in the research? (3) On which issues do the authors agree? and (4) What future research priorities emerge in the studies? We used the Cohen kappa statistic to validate the interrater reliability. RESULTS: The 13 articles included in the review demonstrated the feasibility of cartilage bioprinting in live animal studies. Some investigators are already considering short-term human experimentation, although technical limitations still need to be resolved. Both the use and manufacturing process of stem cells need to be standardized, and a consensus is needed regarding the composition of hydrogels. Using on-site printing strategies and predesigned implants may allow techniques to adapt to multiple situations. In addition, the predictive capacity of implant behavior may lead to optimal results. CONCLUSIONS: Cartilage bioprinting for surgical applications is nearing its initial use in humans. Current research suggests that surgeons will soon be able to replace damaged tissue with bioprinted material.

Orthopedic Surgeons' Perspectives on the Decision-Making Process for the Use of Bioprinter Cartilage Grafts: Web-Based Survey.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic and degenerative lesions in the cartilage are one of the most difficult and frustrating types of injuries for orthopedic surgeons and patients. Future developments in medical science, regenerative medicine, and materials science may allow the repair of human body parts using 3D bioprinting techniques and serve as a basis for new therapies for tissue and organ regeneration. One future possibility is the treatment of joint cartilage defects with in vivo 3D printing from biological/biocompatible materials to produce a suitable cell attachment and proliferation environment in the damaged site and employ the natural recovery potential of the body. This study focuses on the perspectives of orthopedic surgeons regarding the key factors/determinants and perceived clinical value of a new therapeutic option. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the knowledge and expectations of orthopedic surgeons regarding the clinical use of bioprinted cartilage. METHODS: The survey, conducted anonymously and self-managed, was sent to orthopedic surgeons from the Catalan Society of Orthopedic and Traumatology Surgery. In accordance with the method devised by Eysenbach, the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys was used to analyze the results. The following factors were taken into consideration: the type and origin of the information received; its relevance; the level of acceptance of new technologies; and how the technology is related to age, years, and place of experience in the field. RESULTS: Of the 86 orthopedic surgeons included, 36 believed the age of the patient was a restriction, 53 believed the size of the lesion should be between 1 and 2 cm to be considered for this type of technology, and 51 believed that the graft should last more than 5 years. Surgeons over 50 years of age (38/86, 44%) gave more importance to clinical evidence as compared to surgeons from the other age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The perspective of orthopedic surgeons depends highly on the information they receive and whether it is specialized and consistent, as this will condition their acceptance and implementation of the bioprinted cartilage.