Wearable Sensors as a Preoperative Assessment Tool: A Review.

Surgery is a common first-line treatment for many types of disease, including cancer. Mortality rates after general elective surgery have seen significant decreases whilst postoperative complications remain a frequent occurrence. Preoperative assessment tools are used to support patient risk stratification but do not always provide a precise and accessible assessment. Wearable sensors (WS) provide an accessible alternative that offers continuous monitoring in a non-clinical setting. They have shown consistent uptake across the perioperative period but there has been no review of WS as a preoperative assessment tool. This paper reviews the developments in WS research that have application to the preoperative period. Accelerometers were consistently employed as sensors in research and were frequently combined with photoplethysmography or electrocardiography sensors. Pre-processing methods were discussed and missing data was a common theme; this was dealt with in several ways, commonly by employing an extraction threshold or using imputation techniques. Research rarely processed raw data; commercial devices that employ internal proprietary algorithms with pre-calculated heart rate and step count were most commonly employed limiting further feature extraction. A range of machine learning models were used to predict outcomes including support vector machines, random forests and regression models. No individual model clearly outperformed others. Deep learning proved successful for predicting exercise testing outcomes but only within large sample-size studies. This review outlines the challenges of WS and provides recommendations for future research to develop WS as a viable preoperative assessment tool.

Frontline Health Care Workers' Mental Health and Well-Being During the First Year of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Interviews and Social Media Data.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on fractures in health care systems worldwide and continues to have a significant impact, particularly in relation to the health care workforce. Frontline staff have been exposed to unprecedented strain, and delivering care during the pandemic has affected their safety, mental health, and well-being. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the experiences of health care workers (HCWs) delivering care in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand their well-being needs, experiences, and strategies used to maintain well-being (at individual and organizational levels). METHODS: We analyzed 94 telephone interviews with HCWs and 2000 tweets about HCWs' mental health during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The results were grouped under 6 themes: redeployment, clinical work, and sense of duty; well-being support and HCW's coping strategies; negative mental health effects; organizational support; social network and support; and public and government support. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the need for open conversations, where staff's well-being needs and the strategies they adopted can be shared and encouraged, rather than implementing top-down psychological interventions alone. At the macro level, the findings also highlighted the impact on HCW's well-being of public and government support as well as the need to ensure protection through personal protective equipment, testing, and vaccines for frontline workers.

Estimating postoperative mortality in colorectal surgery- a systematic review of risk prediction models.

PURPOSE: Risk prediction models are frequently used to support decision-making in colorectal surgery but can be inaccurate. Machine learning (ML) is becoming increasingly popular, and its application may increase predictive accuracy. We compared conventional risk prediction models for postoperative mortality (based on regression analysis) with ML models to determine the benefit of the latter approach. METHODS: The study was registered in PROSPERO(CRD42022364753). Following the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, WoS) was conducted (from 1/1/2000 to 29/09/2022). Studies were included if they reported the development of a risk model to estimate short-term postoperative mortality for patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Discrimination and calibration performance metrics were compared. Studies were evaluated against CHARMS and TRIPOD criteria. RESULTS: 3,052 articles were screened, and 45 studies were included. The total sample size was 1,356,058 patients. Six studies used ML techniques for model development. Most studies (n = 42) reported the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) as a measure of discrimination. There was no significant difference in the mean AUROC values between regression models (0.833 s.d. ± 0.52) and ML (0.846 s.d. ± 0.55), p = 0.539. Calibration statistics, which measure the agreement between predicted estimates and observed outcomes, were less consistent. Risk of bias assessment found most concerns in the data handling and analysis domains of eligible studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed comparable predictive performance between regression and ML methods in colorectal surgery. Integration of ML in colorectal risk prediction is promising but further refinement of the models is required to support routine clinical adoption.

Lung cancer symptom appraisal, help-seeking and diagnosis - rapid systematic review of differences between patients with and without a smoking history.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the world. A significant minority of lung cancer patients have never smoked (14% in the UK, and ranging from 10% to 25% worldwide). Current evidence suggests that never-smokers encounter delays during the diagnostic pathway, yet it is unclear how their experiences and reasons for delayed diagnoses differ from those of current and former smokers. This rapid review assessed literature about patient experiences in relation to symptom awareness and appraisal, help-seeking, and the lung cancer diagnostic pathway, comparing patients with and without a smoking history. METHODS: MEDLINE, PsychINFO and Google Scholar were searched for studies (2010-2020) that investigated experiences of the pathway to diagnosis for patients with and without a smoking history. Findings are presented using a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Analysis of seven quantitative and three qualitative studies revealed that some delays during symptom appraisal and diagnosis are unique to never-smokers. Due to the strong link between smoking and lung cancer, and low awareness of non-smoking related lung cancer risk factors and symptoms, never-smokers do not perceive themselves to be at risk. Never-smokers are also likely to evaluate their experiences in comparison with other non-smoking related cancers, where prognosis is likely better, potentially leading to lower satisfaction with healthcare. CONCLUSION: Never-smokers appear to have different experiences in relation to symptom appraisal and diagnosis. However, evidence in relation to help-seeking, and what is driving diagnostic delays for never-smoker patients specifically is lacking.

Mental health and well-being of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: contrasting guidelines with experiences in practice.

BACKGROUND: Substantial evidence has highlighted the importance of considering the mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and several organisations have issued guidelines with recommendations. However, the definition of well-being and the evidence base behind such guidelines remain unclear. AIMS: The aims of the study are to assess the applicability of well-being guidelines in practice, identify unaddressed healthcare workers' needs and provide recommendations for supporting front-line staff during the current and future pandemics. METHOD: This paper discusses the findings of a qualitative study based on interviews with front-line healthcare workers in the UK (n = 33), and examines them in relation to a rapid review of well-being guidelines developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 14). RESULTS: The guidelines placed greater emphasis on individual mental health and psychological support, whereas healthcare workers placed greater emphasis on structural conditions at work, responsibilities outside the hospital and the invaluable support of the community. The well-being support interventions proposed in the guidelines did not always respond to the lived experiences of staff, as some reported not being able to participate in these interventions because of understaffing, exhaustion or clashing schedules. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers expressed well-being needs that aligned with socio-ecological conceptualisations of well-being related to quality of life. This approach to well-being has been highlighted in literature on support of healthcare workers in previous health emergencies, but it has not been monitored during this pandemic. Well-being guidelines should explore the needs of healthcare workers, and contextual characteristics affecting the implementation of recommendations.

Perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has set unprecedented demand on the healthcare workforce around the world. The UK has been one of the most affected countries in Europe. The aim of this study was to explore the perceptions and experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs) in relation to COVID-19 and care delivery models implemented to deal with the pandemic in the UK. METHODS: The study was designed as a rapid appraisal combining: (1) a review of UK healthcare policies (n=35 policies), (2) mass media and social media analysis of front-line staff experiences and perceptions (n=101 newspaper articles, n=1 46 000 posts) and (3) in-depth (telephone) interviews with front-line staff (n=30 interviews). The findings from all streams were analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Limited personal protective equipment (PPE) and lack of routine testing created anxiety and distress and had a tangible impact on the workforce. When PPE was available, incorrect size and overheating complicated routine work. Lack of training for redeployed staff and the failure to consider the skills of redeployed staff for new areas were identified as problems. Positive aspects of daily work reported by HCWs included solidarity between colleagues, the establishment of well-being support structures and feeling valued by society. CONCLUSION: Our study highlighted the importance of taking into consideration the experiences and concerns of front-line staff during a pandemic. Staff working in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic advocated clear and consistent guidelines, streamlined testing of HCWs, administration of PPE and acknowledgement of the effects of PPE on routine practice.