Focusing on experts: Expectations of healthcare professionals regarding the use of telemedicine in intensive care units.

Objectives: Telemedical applications are solutions to challenges in the healthcare system. However, it is unclear what intensive care unit healthcare professionals expect from such solutions. This study investigated the expectations and concerns of nurses and physicians when implementing telemedicine tools in intensive care units (tele-ICU). Methods: The study was conducted in intensive care units in 2020 during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. It used a mixed-methods approach targeted at physicians and nurses and involved 14 qualitative interviews and 63 quantitative questionnaires. Results: The qualitative and quantitative data showed that both nurses and physicians were willing to use tele-ICU. Nurses recognised the advantages of real-time access to expertise offered by tele-ICU, but feared this would reduce physicians' on-site patient time. Physicians, in turn, were concerned that they would be expected to be continuously on call. The majority in both groups agreed that any tele-ICU solution must be simple to use and integrate easily into existing organisational structures, networks, and work routines. Additionally, COVID-19 significantly influenced expectations: those who reported having more personal health concerns during the pandemic were more predisposed to favour the use of tele-ICU. Conclusions: Overall, tele-ICU supports better care, but a successful implementation depends on its ease of use and context-sensitive approaches. Effectively integrating tele-ICU solutions into daily clinical routines requires input from nurses and physicians and their involvement in the implementation process from the outset, as well as consideration of existing organisational structures. Such measures will vastly increase the chance of acceptance and successful adoption of telemedical solutions in clinical practice.

Influence of various factors on the legal outcome of cases of child abuse-experiences gathered at an interdisciplinary forensic examination center in Vienna, Austria.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To improve the currently low conviction rate in cases of child abuse a forensic examination center for children and adolescents (FOKUS) was established in Vienna, Austria. Besides a state of the art treatment combined with forensic documentation, one of FOKUS' key goals is to identify potential areas for improvements within the process legal proceedings in cases of child abuse through constant scientific monitoring. The accompanying study at hand includes all patients referred to FOKUS within a two year timeframe (n = 233), monitoring their progression from first contact with the medical professionals from FOKUS to the end of criminal proceedings. A detailed analysis of case files was performed in those cases that were reported to the legal authorities by the clinicians of FOKUS (n = 87). Aim of the study is to investigate which factors contribute to the initiation of legal proceedings and a successful conviction. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that main proceedings were opened more often in cases where the offender was an adult (p < 0.001) or admitted his guilt (p < 0.001) and if digital traces were available (p = 0.001) or trial support (p = 0.024) present. Furthermore, the combined occurrence of medical documentation and victim disclosure was related to a higher probability of opening main trials. CONCLUSION: These findings underline how challenging the successful persecution of an offender in cases of child abuse is.

The influence of explainable vs non-explainable clinical decision support systems on rapid triage decisions: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a variety of clinical decision support systems (CDSS) were developed to aid patient triage. However, research focusing on the interaction between decision support systems and human experts is lacking. METHODS: Thirty-two physicians were recruited to rate the survival probability of 59 critically ill patients by means of chart review. Subsequently, one of two artificial intelligence systems advised the physician of a computed survival probability. However, only one of these systems explained the reasons behind its decision-making. In the third step, physicians reviewed the chart once again to determine the final survival probability rating. We hypothesized that an explaining system would exhibit a higher impact on the physicians' second rating (i.e., higher weight-on-advice). RESULTS: The survival probability rating given by the physician after receiving advice from the clinical decision support system was a median of 4 percentage points closer to the advice than the initial rating. Weight-on-advice was not significantly different (p = 0.115) between the two systems (with vs without explanation for its decision). Additionally, weight-on-advice showed no difference according to time of day or between board-qualified and not yet board-qualified physicians. Self-reported post-experiment overall trust was awarded a median of 4 out of 10 points. When asked after the conclusion of the experiment, overall trust was 5.5/10 (non-explaining median 4 (IQR 3.5-5.5), explaining median 7 (IQR 5.5-7.5), p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Although overall trust in the models was low, the median (IQR) weight-on-advice was high (0.33 (0.0-0.56)) and in line with published literature on expert advice. In contrast to the hypothesis, weight-on-advice was comparable between the explaining and non-explaining systems. In 30% of cases, weight-on-advice was 0, meaning the physician did not change their rating. The median of the remaining weight-on-advice values was 50%, suggesting that physicians either dismissed the recommendation or employed a "meeting halfway" approach. Newer technologies, such as clinical reasoning systems, may be able to augment the decision process rather than simply presenting unexplained bias.

Patent analysis of digital sensors for continuous glucose monitoring.

The high need for optimal diabetes management among an ever-increasing number of patients dictates the development and implementation of new digital sensors for continuous glucose monitoring. The purpose of this work is to systematize the global patenting trends of digital sensors for continuous glucose monitoring and analyze their effectiveness in controlling the treatment of diabetes patients of different ages and risk groups. The Lens database was used to build the patent landscape of sensors for continuous glucose monitoring. Retrospective analysis showed that the patenting of sensors for continuous glucose monitoring had positive trend over the analyzed period (2000-2022). Leading development companies are Dexcom Inc., Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., Medtronic Minimed Inc., Roche Diabetes Care Inc., Roche Diagnostics Operations Inc., Roche Diabetes Care Gmbh, and Ascensia Diabetes Care Holdings Ag, among others. Since 2006, a new approach has emerged where digital sensors are used for continuous glucose monitoring, and smartphones act as receivers for the data. Additionally, telemedicine communication is employed to facilitate this process. This opens up new opportunities for assessing the glycemic profile (glycemic curve information, quantitative assessment of the duration and amplitude of glucose fluctuations, and so on), which may contribute to improved diabetes management. A number of digital sensors for minimally invasive glucose monitoring are patented, have received FDA approval, and have been on the market for over 10 years. Their effectiveness in the clinic has been proven, and advantages and disadvantages have been clarified. Digital sensors offer a non-invasive option for monitoring blood glucose levels, providing an alternative to traditional invasive methods. This is particularly useful for patients with diabetes who require frequent monitoring, including before and after meals, during and after exercise, and in other scenarios where glucose levels can fluctuate. However, non-invasive glucose measurements can also benefit patients without diabetes, such as those following a dietary treatment plan, pregnant women, and individuals during fasting periods like Ramadan. The availability of non-invasive monitoring is especially valuable for patients in high-risk groups and across different age ranges. New world trends have been identified in the patenting of digital sensors for non-invasive glucose monitoring in interstitial skin fluid, saliva, sweat, tear fluid, and exhaled air. A number of non-invasive devices have received the CE mark approval, which confirms that the items meet European health, safety, and environmental protection standards (TensorTip Combo-Glucometer, Cnoga Medical Ltd.; SugarBEAT, Nemaura Medical; GlucoTrack, GlucoTrack Inc.), but are not FDA-approved yet. The above-mentioned sensors have characteristics that make them popular in the treatment of diabetes: they do not require implantation, do not cause an organism reaction to a foreign body, and are convenient to use. In the EU, in order to increase clinical safety and the level of transparency about medical devices, manufacturers must obtain certificates in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/745, taking into account the transition period. The development of systems, which include digital sensors for continuous glucose monitoring, mobile applications, and web platforms for professional analysis of glycemic control and implementation of unified glycemic assessment principles in mobile healthcare, represent promising approaches for controlling glycaemia in patients.

Employer impact on COVID-19 vaccine uptake among nursing and social care employees in Austria.

Introduction: Since becoming available, vaccines against COVID-19 have been a focus of public debate. This is particularly relevant among healthcare and social workers, who interact with vulnerable patients and clients on a daily basis. With employers implementing educational programs and offering incentives to raise vaccine willingness among their staff, it is crucial to understand drivers of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy as well as the impact employers can play on vaccine decision-making. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study via computer-assisted telephone and web interviews. We recruited from a pool of employees from nursing and social care institutions in Vienna and Lower Austria operated by one healthcare NGO. Variables included in the analysis were socio-demographic attributes, reasons for or against the vaccine, sources of information, opinions of mandatory vaccination, and whether respondents had previously been infected with COVID-19 or knew someone who had. Results: 86.2% of respondents had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. 13.8% were unvaccinated. Vaccinated respondents' main reason for getting the vaccine was to protect themselves (79.6%) as well as others (74.1%), while non-vaccinated respondents cited a fear of short or long-term side effects (58.8 and 42.4%, respectively) as their primary reason for not getting vaccinated. 72.8% of the unvaccinated said no incentive would make them change their mind, while 17.4% specified abstract concepts or systemic change as effective incentives. Monetary incentives were not seen as a motivator. Unvaccinated respondents were significantly more worried about the future than vaccinated respondents (78.8 vs. 26.3%, p < 0.001). They were also significantly more likely to view their employers' vaccine recommendations as "manipulative" (50.6 vs. 12.4%, p < 0.001), while vaccinated respondents were significantly more likely to view them as "supportive" (68.0 vs. 25.9%, p < 0.001). Conclusion: While employers have the means to mediate public health decision-making by providing information, deciding to become vaccinated is a more complex process including public debate, world views, political influences, and the uptake of information. Employers can act as mediators for public health decision-making, moving policy measures beyond an individualized view of health choices and health literacy toward more structural, systemic, and community-based efforts.

Views on Assisted Suicide and Religious Beliefs.

After the Austrian constitutional court decided to legalise assisted suicide, we conducted this cross-sectional survey study to assess how persons living in Austria viewed the decision, and whether their views associated with religious and/or moral beliefs. We found that persons claiming to be religious were significantly less likely to approve of the court's decision. They also advocated for significantly stricter regulations than non-religious respondents. When asked to give reasons for their response, several religious respondents cited their religious beliefs, highlighting that there is often an association between stronger religious beliefs and less favourable views on assisted suicide.

Using telemedicine in nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-perspective view on the implementation process.

AIM: Centring on nursing homes, we analysed the implementation process of a tablet- and videoconferencing-based telemedicine application from the perspectives of management, nursing staff and physicians. DESIGN: We used a qualitative design based on interviews to explore diverse perspectives on the implementation of telemedicine. METHODS: We conducted fourteen face-to-face or online interviews with a purposeful sample of five managers, six nurses and three general practitioners treating residents in Austrian nursing homes during the COVID-19 pandemic. We condensed data using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Nursing home management implemented telemedicine rapidly, using a top-down approach met with ambivalence by staff. On the part of nurses, their professional understanding of person-centred care was challenged. Telemedicine also impacted cooperation between nurses and physicians, influencing their respective understanding of their roles. Working experience with digital nursing documentation had a positive effect on users' acceptance of the telemedicine solution.