Comparison of Slate Safety Wearable Device to Ingestible Pill and Wearable Heart Rate Monitor.

BACKGROUND: With the increase in concern for deaths and illness related to the increase in temperature globally, there is a growing need for real-time monitoring of workers for heat stress indicators. The purpose of this study was to determine the usability of the Slate Safety (SS) wearable physiological monitoring system. METHODS: Twenty nurses performed a common task in a moderate or hot environment while wearing the SS device, the Polar 10 monitor, and having taken the e-Celsius ingestible pill. Data from each device was compared for correlation and accuracy. RESULTS: High correlation was determined between the SS wearable device and the Polar 10 system (0.926) and the ingestible pill (0.595). The SS was comfortable to wear and easily monitored multiple participants from a distance. CONCLUSIONS: The Slate Safety wearable device demonstrated accuracy in measuring core temperature and heart rate while not restricting the motion of the worker, and provided a remote monitoring platform for physiological parameters.

Ohio physician attitudes toward medical Cannabis and Ohio's medical marijuana program.

BACKGROUND: Ohio's medical cannabis program is one of three states that require physicians to become certified to recommend medical cannabis to their patients. The current study examines the attitudes of Ohio physicians toward medical cannabis and Ohio's program to ascertain how likely physicians are to participate in Ohio's program. METHODS: Physicians were invited to complete an internet survey that asked them about their concerns regarding medical marijuana, Ohio's program, their likelihood of recommending medical cannabis, and becoming certified within the state. Ordinal and logistic regressions were used to understand the physicians' likelihood of recommending cannabis, of becoming certified to recommend cannabis, and their attitude toward Ohio's program. RESULTS: In total, 11,665 physicians licensed to practice in Ohio were contacted by email, and 344 responses were received for a response rate of 2.9%. Only 42 physicians reported being certified or had plans to become certified to recommend marijuana, and 62% were unlikely to recommend marijuana to their patients. Overall, the belief that medical cannabis should be legal had the greatest association with the likelihood of recommending cannabis (OR = .37, 95% CI = .24-.54), of becoming certified (OR = .21, 95% CI = .10-.38), and believing that Ohio's program is too strict (OR = .39, 95% CI = .30-.51). However, the study sample precludes generalizing the results beyond this study. The 2.9% response rate could indicate a bias toward physicians who have strong opinions about the legality of medical cannabis. CONCLUSION: The results show that many physicians have concerns about medical cannabis and Ohio's program, and many physicians may not participate in the program. This could be a problem for patients who would like to use cannabis for medical reasons; therefore, these patients, may need to utilize one physician for cannabis and another for regular care. Physicians will likely be caring for patients who are using cannabis regardless of their own beliefs about it. The lack of training regarding cannabis in healthcare, along with requiring "certified recommenders" to have training could result in a fractured healthcare system.