BackgroundPortal use has been studied among outpatients, but its utility and impact on inpatients is unclear. This study describes portal adoption and use among hospitalized cancer patients and investigates associations with selected safety, utilization, and satisfaction measures.MethodsA retrospective review of 4594 adult hospitalized cancer patients was conducted between 2012 and 2014 at Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida, comparing portal adopters, who registered for a portal account prior to hospitalization, with nonadopters. Adopters were classified by their portal activity during hospitalization as active or inactive inpatient users. Univariate and several logistic and linear regression models were used for analysis.ResultsOf total patients, 2352 (51.2%) were portal adopters, and of them, 632 (26.8%) were active inpatient users. Portal adoption was associated with patients who were young, female, married, with higher income, and had more frequent hospitalizations (P < .05). Active inpatient use was associated with patients who were young, married, nonlocals, with higher disease severity, and were hospitalized for medical treatment (P < .05). In univariate analyses, self-management knowledge scores were higher among adopters vs nonadopters (84.3 and 80.0, respectively; P = .01) and among active vs inactive inpatient users (87.0 and 83.3, respectively; P = .04). In regression models adjusted for age and disease severity, the association between portal behaviors and majority of measures were not significant (P > .05).ConclusionsOver half of our cancer inpatients adopted a portal prior to hospitalization, with increased adoption associated with predisposing and enabling determinants (eg: age, sex, marital status, income), and increased inpatient use associated with need (eg: nonlocal residence and disease severity). Additional research and greater effort to expand the portal functionality is needed to impact inpatient outcomes.

Use of the patient portal in the inpatient setting may not improve hospital outcomes. Future research should examine the association of portal use with more immediate inpatient health outcomes such as patient experience, patient engagement, medication reconciliation, and prevention of adverse events.

Background: Managing the safety climate in health care is a promising tool for improving employee and patient safety in the health care work environment. Gaps in the theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of safety climate, as well as the evidence base for its practical application in health care remain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the number of work injuries occurring in health care work units and associated safety climate beliefs. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted utilizing organizational staff survey data collected by a large medical hospital in the Midwest in 2015. Employees ( n = 32,327) were invited to identify safety climate perceptions via survey. Injuries, days restricted, and days absent were identified through the Hospital’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) log. Zero inflated negative binomial regressions used injuries as dependent variables and safety climate perceptions as independent variables. Findings: In all, 23,599 employees completed the survey (73% response rate) across 1,805 employee work units which were defined as groupings of employees reporting to a single supervisor. We found that there was an association between fewer injuries and health care workers indicating that they share responsibility for compliance with safety rules and procedures (relative risk [RR] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.98, 0.99]). Conclusion/Application to Practice: This study supports the use of a safety climate measure to assess working units’ perceptions of employee safety. A continued focus on the health and safety of employees who interact directly with patients is warranted, as well as employees who do not provide direct patient care.

Background The objective of this study was to investigate the knowledge and attitudes of Saudi Arabian citizens towards telemedicine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods A cross-sectional survey was designed to carry out this study. The electronic survey, prepared using Google Forms, was distributed to 1500 randomly selected citizens of Saudi Arabia. A total of 330 participants completed and returned the questionnaire. Basic statistics were used to describe the data. Results The majority of the respondents (73.9%) were female. More than half of them (54.8%) were &gt;35 y of age and had graduate or postgraduate degrees (65.5%). A total of 96.7% of the respondents were Saudis. Most of the participants (70.0%) were familiar with the term ‘telemedicine’ and thought that telemedicine (92.1%) could reduce transportation costs. Of the respondents, 58.8% had not seen a telemedicine system before and 67.0% indicated that they had not previously used telemedicine services. A total of 87.3% of the participants agreed or strongly agreed that telemedicine was a useful tool during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, more than half of the participants agreed or strongly agreed that telemedicine facilitates the diagnosis of people (58.8%), increases communication (58.2%), reduces clinic visits (85.9%) and performs tasks quickly (70.3%). Also, 51.5% of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that telemedicine affects patient privacy. Conclusions The outcomes indicated that most of the participants had a positive attitude towards the use of telemedicine as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia. They believed that telemedicine saves time, labour and costs and is an effective tool to treat coronavirus patients at a safe distance. However, the government should develop programs to raise awareness in the population about the use of telemedicine for the treatment of various diseases that afflict the Saudi Arabian people. Likewise, a legal framework must be implemented to protect the privacy of patients and healthcare providers.

Background Virtual reality (VR) is an innovative distraction technology in health care, but little is known about this topic in Saudi Arabia. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of using VR to reduce pain and fear among children during vaccination. Methods It is a cross-sectional study design. A total of 104 children (ages 4–6 years) receiving routine vaccinations in a single primary health care in Eastern Region, Saudi Arabia, participated in the study and grouped to a VR technology intervention group or vaccination as usual without VR distraction. The primary outcome is the difference in the child’s self-rated fear and pain scores between those who have been vaccinated with or without VR distraction, measured by the two validated international facial expressions scales Wong–Baker FACES Pain Scale and Children’s Fear Scale. Results In the two-month study period, 53 children were vaccinated using the VR technology and 50 children were vaccinated without VR. Bivariate analysis showed a significantly lower pain score among the VR group ( =1.36, SD 2.06) compared with the group without VR ( =6.90, SD 3.47) (P-value < 0.001). Similarly, fear score was lower in the VR group ( =0.64, SD 0.92) compared with the group without VR ( =2.88, SD1.55) (P < 0.001). In multivariable regression models adjusted for age and gender, children vaccinated using the VR technology had significantly lower pain and fear scores compared with those who were vaccinated as usual without VR distraction. Conclusion VR technology showed a positive impact on reducing pain and fear among children aged 4–6 years during vaccination. Policymakers are encouraged to expand the use of this distraction tool in primary health centers to improve the vaccination experience among children.