Objective Real-time locating systems (RTLS) enable contact tracing and hand hygiene reminders, to improve hospital safety. Successful implementation requires healthcare personnel (HCP) to carry RTLS tags continuously. We assessed for determinants of HCP’s willingness to use RTLS tags during routine inpatient care, and evaluated concerns using mixed-methods analysis. Materials and Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study in the 330-bed purpose-built National Centre for Infectious Diseases in Singapore, from January 15 through February 4, 2020. The anonymous survey comprised 24 questions based on constructs from behavioral models and an open-ended question. Principal component analysis was performed to derive the latent factor structure applied in the multivariable logistic regression analysis. Concerns were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Of 260 HCP (nurses [40.8%], ancillary and administrative staff [23.1%], allied health professionals [18.5%], and physicians [17.7%]), 75% were willing to use the RTLS tag. After adjusting for age, gender, healthcare professional group, and duration of practice, the acceptance of the use of the RTLS tag (adjusted OR 11.28 [95% CI 4.39–29.00], P < .001) was highly associated with the willingness to use the RTLS tag. HCP who perceived the tag to be easy to use (adjusted OR 2.80 [95% CI 1.37–5.72], P = .005), were also more willing to use the tag. HCP were willing to carry the RTLS tag for the purpose of contact tracing despite privacy concerns. Conclusion More communications on the intentions and data protection standards of the RTLS, and accessory enhancements for HCP’s convenient and sustained use of the RTLS tag are crucial, to optimize RTLS’s usefulness during the COVID-19 pandemic.
ObjectiveS: Hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) for blood and bone marrow disorders is a costly procedure that requires complex treatment regimens. In addition to disease-related factors, comorbidity and psychosocial characteristics can affect transplant outcomes and cost of care. Our objective was to examine the impact of psychosocial factors and variations in health insurance coverage on post-HCT health services utilization. MethOdS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study including 96 autologous and 40 allogeneic adult recipients transplanted in 2013-2016 at our medical center. Patient suitability for transplant was scored using an abbreviated 6-item Psychosocial Assessment of Candidates for Transplantation (PACT) scale ranging from 0 (poor) to 4 (excellent). Patients were stratified into two groups: low risk (score 3 and 4) and moderate/high risk (score 1 and 2). We analyzed the association of psychosocial score with the hospital length of stay during the first year after HCT. ReSultS: The most frequent indication for autologous transplant was multiple myeloma (73%), and for allogeneic, acute myeloid leukemia (43%). The disease risk at transplant was high in 22.5% of autologous, and in 15% of allogeneic transplants. The median survival time after transplant was 773 (4-1638) days for autologous and 442 (9-1613) days for allogeneic. The length of stay during subsequent hospitalizations in the first year was 1.8 days (SD= 4.09) for autologous and 19.3 (SD= 28.58) for allogeneic. Factors associated with shorter hospital stay in autologous transplants were higher PACT scores (RR 0.43, 95%CI 0.75-0.09 p= .011), availability of a care partner (RR 0.44 95%CI 0.78-.11 p= .012) and underinsured/Medicaid status (RR 0.81 95%CI 0.01-1.63 p= .05). In the allogeneic group higher PACT scores (RR 0.74 95%CI 0.92-0.56 p< .0001) were associated with shorter hospitalization periods. cOncluSiOnS: Psychosocial factors, availability of a care partner and health insurance can predict post-HCT healthcare cost. A prospective psychosocial evaluation score may have a prognostic significance for transplant outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.