Background Our aim was to conduct a post participation survey of respondent experiences with in-home remote patient monitoring via telehealth for blood pressure monitoring of women with postpartum hypertension. We hypothesized that the in-home remote patient monitoring application will be implemented with strong fidelity and have positive patient acceptability. Methods This analysis was a planned secondary analysis of a non-randomized controlled trial of telehealth with remote blood pressure patient monitoring for postpartum hypertension compared to standard outpatient monitoring in women with a hypertension-related diagnosis during pregnancy. In collaboration with survey experts, we developed a 41-item web-based survey to assess 1) perception of quality of care received, 2) ease of use/ease to learn the telehealth program, 3) effective orientation of equipment, 4) level of perceived security/privacy utilizing telehealth and 5) problems encountered. The survey included multiple question formats including Likert scale responses, dichotomous Yes/No responses, and free text. We performed a descriptive analysis on all responses and then performed regression analysis on a subset of questions most relevant to the domains of interest. The qualitative data collected through open ended responses was analyzed to determine relevant categories. Intervention participants who completed the study received the survey at the 6-week study endpoint. Results Sixty six percent of respondents completed the survey. The majority of women found the technology fit easily into their lifestyle. Privacy concerns were minimal and factors that influenced this included age, BMI, marital status, and readmissions. 95% of women preferred remote care for postpartum follow-up, in which hypertensive type, medication use and ethnicity were found to be significant factors in influencing location of follow-up. Most women were satisfied with the devices, but rates varied by hypertensive type, infant discharge rates and BMI. Conclusions Postpartum women perceived the telehealth remote intervention was a safe, easy to use method that represented an acceptable burden of care and an overall satisfying method for postpartum blood pressure monitoring. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identification number: NCT03111095 Date of registration: April 12, 2017.

As members of a university community that sponsors animal research, we developed a survey to improve our knowledge about factors underlying the perceived justifiability of animal research among faculty and undergraduate students. To accomplish this objective, we gathered quantitative data about their general views on animal use by humans, their specific views about the use of different species to address different categories of scientific questions, and their confidence in the translatability of animal research to humans. Students and faculty did not differ in their reported levels of concern for the human use of animals, but women reported significantly higher levels of concern than men. Among students, experience with animal research was positively correlated with less concern with animal use, and having practiced vegetarianism or veganism was associated with more concern. Gender, experience with animal research, and dietary preferences were similarly correlated with the extent of justifiability of animal use across all research purposes and species. Faculty responses resembled those for students, with the exception that justifiability varied significantly based on academic discipline: biological sciences faculty were least concerned about human use of animals and most supportive of animal research regardless of purpose or species. For both students and faculty, justifiability varied depending on research purpose or animal species. Research purposes, ranked in order of justifiability from high to low, was animal disease, human disease, basic research, human medicine, animal production, chemical testing, and cosmetics. Justifiability by purpose was slightly lower for students than for faculty. Species justifiability for students, from high to low, was small fish, rats or mice, pigs or sheep, monkeys, and dogs or cats. Faculty order was the same except that monkeys and dogs or cats were reversed in order. Finally, confidence in the translatability of animal research to our understanding of human biology and medicine was not different between students and faculty or between genders, but among faculty it was highest in biological sciences followed by physical sciences, social sciences, and then arts and humanities. Those

As researchers increasingly use mail survey methods to collect health and other data, research focused on optimizing features of survey design and administration in cost-effective ways is needed. We conducted two studies to examine the effects of sequential prepaid

Research using animals is controversial. To develop sound public outreach and policy about this issue, we need information about both the underlying science and people’s attitudes and knowledge. To identify attitudes toward this subject at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, we developed and administered a survey to undergraduate students and faculty. The survey asked respondents about the importance of, their confidence in their knowledge about, and who they trusted to provide information on animal research. Findings indicated attitudes varied by academic discipline, especially among faculty. Faculty in the biological sciences, particularly those who had participated in an animal research project, reported the issue to be most important, and they reported greater confidence in their knowledge about pro and con arguments. Among students, being female, a vegetarian/vegan, or participating in animal research were associated with higher ratings of importance. Confidence in knowledge about regulation and its adequacy was very low across all groups except biological science faculty. Both students and faculty identified university courses and spokespersons to be the most trusted sources of information about animal research. UW-Madison has a long history of openness about animal research, which correlates with the high level of trust by students and faculty. Nevertheless, confidence in knowledge about animal research and its regulation remains limited, and both students and faculty indicated their desire to receive more information from courses and spokespersons. Based on these findings, we argue that providing robust university-wide outreach and course-based content about animal research should be considered an organizational best practice, in particular for colleges and universities.

No abstract