Search

For patients with chronic liver disease (CLD), telemedicine is emerging as a useful tool to prevent liver decompensation or hospitalization, allowing access to and the decentralization of care, even for patients with limited resources. However, research and attendant evidence are still lacking; thus, this review aims to systematically explore the topic of telemonitoring for CLD to describe the currently used tools and clinical outcomes. The review was conducted by using key terms on PubMed/EMBASE and searching for observational studies or clinical trials (according to PRISMA recommendations) that were published between 6 April 2013 and 6 April 2023 to keep the technological framework limited to the last 10 years. The studies were described and grouped according to the aim of telemonitoring, the underlying disease, and the tools adopted to achieve remote monitoring. A total of 32 articles met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 11 articles report the successful use of a telehealth program to support and improve access to care in the management of HCV-related cirrhosis, eight articles examine the efficacy of telemedicine for remote monitoring interventions to prevent or decrease the risk of decompensation in high-risk patients, and five articles examine improvements in the physical performance and quality of life of cirrhotic patients through telehealth rehabilitation programs. Four studies were completed during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth has the potential to provide and expand treatment access and reduce barriers to care for the most disadvantaged patients and might be able to reduce the need for hospital readmission for CLD, though most practice to test feasibility is still in the pilot stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Nurse-led rounding checklists are a common strategy for facilitating evidence-based practice in the intensive care unit (ICU). To streamline checklist workflow, some ICUs have the nurse or another individual listen to the conversation and customize the checklist for each patient. Such customizations assume that individuals can reliably assess whether checklist items have been addressed. Objective: To evaluate whether 1 critical care nurse can reliably assess checklist items on rounds. Methods: Two nurses performed in-person observation of multidisciplinary ICU rounds. Using a standardized paper-based assessment tool, each nurse indicated whether 17 items related to the ABCDEF bundle were discussed during rounds. For each item, generalizability coefficients were used as a measure of reliability, with a single-rater value of 0.70 or greater considered sufficient to support its assessment by 1 nurse. Results: The nurse observers assessed 118 patient discussions across 15 observation days. For 11 of 17 items (65%), the generalizability coefficient for a single rater met or exceeded the 0.70 threshold. The generalizability coefficients (95% CIs) of a single rater for key items were as follows: pain, 0.86 (0.74-0.97); delirium score, 0.74 (0.64-0.83); agitation score, 0.72 (0.33-1.00); spontaneous awakening trial, 0.67 (0.49-0.83); spontaneous breathing trial, 0.80 (0.70-0.89); mobility, 0.79 (0.69-0.87); and family (future/past) engagement, 0.82 (0.73-0.90). Conclusion: Using a paper-based assessment tool, a single trained critical care nurse can reliably assess the discussion of elements of the ABCDEF bundle during multidisciplinary rounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]