Literature DB >> 27381429

Teletoxicology: Patient Assessment Using Wearable Audiovisual Streaming Technology.

Aaron B Skolnik1,2, Peter R Chai3, Christian Dameff4, Richard Gerkin5,6, Jessica Monas7, Angela Padilla-Jones5, Steven Curry5,6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Audiovisual streaming technologies allow detailed remote patient assessment and have been suggested to change management and enhance triage. The advent of wearable, head-mounted devices (HMDs) permits advanced teletoxicology at a relatively low cost. A previously published pilot study supports the feasibility of using the HMD Google Glass® (Google Inc.; Mountain View, CA) for teletoxicology consultation. This study examines the reliability, accuracy, and precision of the poisoned patient assessment when performed remotely via Google Glass®.
METHODS: A prospective observational cohort study was performed on 50 patients admitted to a tertiary care center inpatient toxicology service. Toxicology fellows wore Google Glass® and transmitted secure, real-time video and audio of the initial physical examination to a remote investigator not involved in the subject's care. High-resolution still photos of electrocardiograms (ECGs) were transmitted to the remote investigator. On-site and remote investigators recorded physical examination findings and ECG interpretation. Both investigators completed a brief survey about the acceptability and reliability of the streaming technology for each encounter. Kappa scores and simple agreement were calculated for each examination finding and electrocardiogram parameter. Reliability scores and reliability difference were calculated and compared for each encounter.
RESULTS: Data were available for analysis of 17 categories of examination and ECG findings. Simple agreement between on-site and remote investigators ranged from 68 to 100 % (median = 94 %, IQR = 10.5). Kappa scores could be calculated for 11/17 parameters and demonstrated slight to fair agreement for two parameters and moderate to almost perfect agreement for nine parameters (median = 0.653; substantial agreement). The lowest Kappa scores were for pupil size and response to light. On a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS), mean comfort level was 93 and mean reliability rating was 89 for on-site investigators. For remote users, the mean comfort and reliability ratings were 99 and 86, respectively. The average difference in reliability scores between on-site and remote investigators was 2.6, with the difference increasing as reliability scores decreased.
CONCLUSION: Remote evaluation of poisoned patients via Google Glass® is possible with a high degree of agreement on examination findings and ECG interpretation. Evaluation of pupil size and response to light is limited, likely by the quality of streaming video. Users of Google Glass® for teletoxicology reported high levels of comfort with the technology and found it reliable, though as reported reliability decreased, remote users were most affected. Further study should compare patient-centered outcomes when using HMDs for consultation to those resulting from telephone consultation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Google glass; Telehealth; Telemedicine; Toxicology; Wearable devices

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27381429      PMCID: PMC5135678          DOI: 10.1007/s13181-016-0567-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Toxicol        ISSN: 1556-9039


  11 in total

1.  Inaccuracy of ECG interpretations reported to the poison center.

Authors:  Jane M Prosser; Silas W Smith; Eugene S Rhim; Dean Olsen; Lewis S Nelson; Robert S Hoffman
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 5.721

2.  Costs of poisoning in the United States and savings from poison control centers: a benefit-cost analysis.

Authors:  T R Miller; D C Lestina
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 5.721

3.  Feasibility and Acceptability of Google Glass for Emergency Department Dermatology Consultations.

Authors:  Peter R Chai; Roger Y Wu; Megan L Ranney; Jayne Bird; Sandy Chai; Brian Zink; Paul S Porter
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 10.282

4.  Texting while driving using Google Glass™: Promising but not distraction-free.

Authors:  Jibo He; William Choi; Jason S McCarley; Barbara S Chaparro; Chun Wang
Journal:  Accid Anal Prev       Date:  2015-05-26

5.  Effect of a medical toxicology admitting service on length of stay, cost, and mortality among inpatients discharged with poisoning-related diagnoses.

Authors:  Steven C Curry; Daniel E Brooks; Aaron B Skolnik; Richard D Gerkin; Stuart Glenn
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2015-03

6.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  The potential impact of poison control centers on rural hospitalization rates for poisoning.

Authors:  Eduard Zaloshnja; Ted Miller; Paul Jones; Toby Litovitz; Jeffrey Coben; Claudia Steiner; Monique Sheppard
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 7.124

8.  The impact of poison control centers on poisoning-related visits to EDs--United States, 2003.

Authors:  Eduard Zaloshnja; Ted Miller; Paul Jones; Toby Litovitz; Jeffrey Coben; Claudia Steiner; Monique Sheppard
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 2.469

9.  Poison control centers decrease emergency healthcare utilization costs.

Authors:  Frank LoVecchio; Steven Curry; Kathleen Waszolek; Jane Klemens; Kimberly Hovseth; Diane Glogan
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2008-12

10.  The Feasibility and Acceptability of Google Glass for Teletoxicology Consults.

Authors:  Peter R Chai; Kavita M Babu; Edward W Boyer
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2015-09
View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Integrating Personalized Technology in Toxicology: Sensors, Smart Glass, and Social Media Applications in Toxicology Research.

Authors:  Stephanie Carreiro; Peter R Chai; Jennifer Carey; Brittany Chapman; Edward W Boyer
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2017-04-12

2.  Telemedicine Delivery and Successful Reimbursement in Toxicology.

Authors:  Peter W Crane; Timothy J Wiegand; Michael Kamali; Marilynn Reif; Rose Wratni; Ronald Montante; Tracey Loveland
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2018-05-29

3.  JMT's Research Concepts Section: a 5-Year Evaluation.

Authors:  David H Jang; Jennifer S Love; Mark B Mycyk
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2019-08-05

4.  Usability and Reliability of Smart Glasses for Secondary Triage During Mass Casualty Incidents.

Authors:  John Broach; Alexander Hart; Matthew Griswold; Jeffrey Lai; Edward W Boyer; Aaron B Skolnik; Peter R Chai
Journal:  Proc Annu Hawaii Int Conf Syst Sci       Date:  2018-01-03

Review 5.  Music as an Adjunct to Opioid-Based Analgesia.

Authors:  Peter R Chai; Stephanie Carreiro; Megan L Ranney; Ketki Karanam; Marko Ahtisaari; Robert Edwards; Kristin L Schreiber; Lubabah Ben-Ghaly; Timothy B Erickson; Edward W Boyer
Journal:  J Med Toxicol       Date:  2017-06-23

6.  A Systematic Review of the Use of Google Glass in Graduate Medical Education.

Authors:  Joseph F Carrera; Connor C Wang; William Clark; Andrew M Southerland
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2019-12

Review 7.  Smart Glasses for Caring Situations in Complex Care Environments: Scoping Review.

Authors:  Charlotte Romare; Lisa Skär
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 4.773

Review 8.  What evidence supports the use of Body Worn Cameras in mental health inpatient wards? A systematic review and narrative synthesis of the effects of Body Worn Cameras in public sector services.

Authors:  Keiran Wilson; Jessica Eaton; Una Foye; Madeleine Ellis; Ellen Thomas; Alan Simpson
Journal:  Int J Ment Health Nurs       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 5.100

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.