| Literature DB >> 32956888 |
Thangaraj Munusamy1, Ravindran Karuppiah2, Nor Faizal A Bahuri2, Sutharshan Sockalingam2, Chun Yoong Cham2, Vicknes Waran3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic poses major risks to health care workers in neurocritical care. Recommendations are in place to limit medical personnel attending to the neurosurgical patient as a protective measure and to conserve personal protective equipment. However, the complexity of the neurosurgical patient proves to be a challenge and an opportunity for innovation. The goal of our study was to determine if telemedicine delivered through smart glasses was feasible and effective in an alternative method of conducting ward round on neurocritical care patients during the pandemic.Entities:
Keywords: Critical care; Neurosurgery; Pandemic; Smart glasses; Telemedicine
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32956888 PMCID: PMC7500328 DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.09.076
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World Neurosurg ISSN: 1878-8750 Impact factor: 2.104
Figure 1Flow diagram of the key steps for each patient review in a virtual ward round.
Figure 2Photographs of a resident wearing smart glasses. (A) Side view with N95 respirator only. (B) Front view with N95 respirator only. (C) Side view with full personal protective equipment (PPE). (D) Front view with full PPE.
Individual Paired Ward Round Summary and Intrarater Reliability
| Paired Ward Round Number | Number of Patients | Number of Virtual Ward Round Decisions/Plans | Number of Changes to Decisions/Plans in Physical Ward Round | Cronbach Alpha |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 5 | 12 | 1 | 0.750 |
| 2 | 11 | 34 | 3 | 0.949 |
| 3 | 8 | 25 | 1 | 0.948 |
| 4 | 9 | 18 | 0 | 1.000 |
| 5 | 10 | 19 | 0 | 1.000 |
| 6 | 12 | 27 | 1 | 0.970 |
| 7 | 10 | 22 | 2 | 0.899 |
| 8 | 14 | 30 | 6 | 0.804 |
| 9 | 10 | 14 | 3 | 0.875 |
| 10 | 14 | 28 | 2 | 0.903 |
Total Paired Ward Rounds Summary and Intrarater Reliability
| Total Number of Paired Ward Rounds | Number of Patients | Number of Virtual Ward Rounds' Decisions/Plans | Number of Changes to Decisions/Plans After Physical Ward Rounds | Intraclass Correlation Coefficient |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 103 | 231 | 19 | 0.936 |
Reason for Changes in Clinical Decision/Plan in Physical Ward Round
| Total Number of Changes to Decision/Plan | Number of Changes According to Reason | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Inadequate Information in Virtual Ward Round | Inaccurate Information in Virtual Ward Round | New Information in Time Interval Between Rounds | |
| 19 | 7 | 0 | 12 |
User Experience of Smart Glasses Teleconsultation in Neurocritical Care∗
| Number | Attributes | Response (%) | Mode Score | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1—Very Poor | 2—Poor | 3—Fair | 4—Good | 5—Excellent | |||
| 1 | Technical quality | 0 | 0 | 0 | 60 | 40 | 4 |
| 2 | Clinical accuracy | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 60 | 5 |
| 3 | Reliability | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 60 | 5 |
| 4 | Overall efficacy | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 60 | 5 |
| 5 | User friendliness | 0 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 60 | 5 |
| 6 | User satisfaction | 0 | 0 | 0 | 40 | 60 | 5 |
Attributes scored on a 5-point Likert scale.
User Perception of Potential Usage for Smart Glasses in Health Care
| Number | Clinical Setting/Application | Response (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No | Maybe | Yes | ||
| 1 | During pandemic | 0 | 0 | 100 |
| 2 | Daily routine use | 20 | 20 | 60 |
| 3 | Out-of-hours ward round | 0 | 20 | 80 |
| 4 | Emergency cases | 0 | 40 | 60 |
| 5 | Nonemergency cases | 0 | 20 | 80 |
| 6 | Infection risk areas | 0 | 0 | 100 |
| 7 | Other use cases in Neurosurgery | 0 | 20 | 80 |
| 8 | Other specialty | 0 | 20 | 80 |