Search

Introduction: Pulmonary hypertension, associated with high mortality in pediatric patients, is traditionally screened for by trained professionals by measuring a tricuspid regurgitant jet velocity (TRJV). Our objective was to test the feasibility of novice physician sonographers (NPS) to perform echocardiograms of adequate quality to exclude pathology (defined as TRJV > 2.5 meters per second).Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of NPS to assess TRJV by echocardiogram in an urban pediatric emergency department. NPS completed an educational course consisting of a didactic curriculum and hands-on workshop. NPS enrolled a convenience sample of patients aged 7-21 years. Our primary outcome was the proportion of echocardiograms with images of adequate quality to exclude pathology. Our secondary outcome was NPS performance on four image elements. We present descriptive statistics, binomial proportions, kappa coefficients, and logistic regression analysis.Results: Eight NPS completed 80 echocardiograms. We found 82.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 74.2-90.8) of echocardiograms had images of adequate quality to exclude pathology. Among image elements, NPS obtained a satisfactory, apical 4-chamber view in 85% (95% CI, 77.1-92.9); positioned the color box accurately 65% (95% CI, 54.5-75.5); optimized TRJV color signal 78.7% (95% CI, 69.8-87.7); and optimized continuous-wave Doppler in 55% (95% CI, 44.1-66.0) of echocardiograms.Conclusion: NPS obtained images of adequate quality to exclude pathology in a majority of studies; however, optimized acquisition of specific image elements varied. This work establishes the basis for future study of NPS assessment of TRJV pathology when elevated pulmonary pressures are of clinical concern.

Background:In December 2021, the Region 1 Disaster Health Response System, the state of Vermont, and the National Emergency Tele-Critical Care Network partnered to provide statewide access to disaster teleconsultations during COVID-19 surge conditions. In this case report, we describe how a disaster teleconsultation system was implemented in Vermont to provide access to temporary tele-critical care consultations during the Omicron COVID-19 surge. Methods:We measured the time from request of service to implementation and calculated descriptive statistics. Results:Seven of Vermont's 14 hospitals requested the service. Despite a technology solution capable of providing services within hours, mean time to service implementation was 27 days (interquartile range 20–41 days). Conclusions:Integration of disaster teleconsultation systems into state and local emergency management plans are needed to bring administrative start-up times in line with technical readiness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The federally funded Region 1 Regional Disaster Health Response System (RDHRS) and the American Burn Association partnered to develop a model regional disaster teleconsultation system within a Medical Emergency Operations Center (MEOC) to support triage and specialty consultation during a no-notice mass casualty incident. Our objective was to test the acceptability and feasibility of a prototype model system in simulated disasters as proof of concept. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods simulation study using the Technology Acceptance Model framework. Participating physicians completed the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) and semistructured interviews after simulations. Results: TUQ item scores rating the model system were highest for usefulness and satisfaction, and lowest for interaction quality and reliability. Conclusions: We found high model acceptance, but desire for a simpler, more reliable technology interface with better audiovisual quality for low-frequency, high-stakes use. Future work will emphasize technology interface quality and reliability, automate coordinator roles, and field test the model system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disasters have many deleterious effects and are becoming more frequent. From a health-care perspective, disasters may cause periods of stress for hospitals and health-care systems. Telemedicine is a rapidly growing technology that has been used to improve access to health-care during disasters. Telemedicine applied in disasters is referred to as disaster telemedicine. Our objective was to conduct a scoping literature review on current use of disaster telemedicine to develop recommendations addressing the most common barriers to implementation of a telemedicine system for regional disaster health response in the United States. Publications on telemedicine in disasters were collected from online databases. This included both publications in English and those translated into English. Predesigned inclusion/exclusion criteria and a PRISMA flow diagram were applied. The PRISMA flow diagram was used on the basis that it would help streamline the available literature. Literature that met the criteria was scored by 2 reviewers who rated relevance to commonly identified disaster telemedicine implementation barriers, as well as how disaster telemedicine systems were implemented. We also identified other frequently mentioned themes and briefly summarized recommendations for those topics. Literature scoring resulted in the following topics: telemedicine usage (42 publications), system design and operating models (43 publications), as well as difficulties with credentialing (5 publications), licensure (6 publications), liability (4 publications), reimbursement (5 publications), and technology (24 publications). Recommendations from each category were qualitatively summarized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Disasters can quickly overwhelm a healthcare system's capacity and exacerbate existing gaps in access to specialty care. The Region 1 RDHRS has developed a disaster telehealth system. This presentation will highlight how a proof of concept developed into a prototype system, and how it is becoming operational. We will elaborate on the barriers of implementing a telehealth system to provide access to acute consultation with disaster-relevant specialists, and the steps the Region 1 RDHRS is taking to develop solutions. Method: An RDHRS is a tiered system across states and regions created to deliver a more coherent and comprehensive response to health security threats. A key RDHRS capability is providing disaster telehealth services to target gaps in healthcare coverage, allowing providers to access disaster-relevant clinical expertise in the immediate aftermath of a catastrophic no-notice event. The Region 1 RDHRS disaster telehealth system can rapidly mobilize a national pool of volunteer specialists to support overwhelmed local providers at the point of care. This system is flexible to support a range of disasters and easy to navigate without prior training. The system is device-agnostic and functions on existing telecommunication systems without requiring new hardware/software installation. Results: Operationalizing a telehealth system to deliver acute episodic unscheduled care across state lines is fraught with challenges. We collaborated with various subject matter experts to develop solutions that allow for rapid volunteer verification, training, and mobilization. Despite advances driven by COVID-19, barriers related to license portability, liability protection, and credentialing of volunteer specialists across state lines remain complex. We are developing disaster waivers and template documents that can be rapidly implemented via executive action at state and regional levels. Conclusion: The Region 1 RDHRS team is collaborating with the other pilot sites within the RDHRS program to develop a unified national disaster telehealth response based on this model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The SDMPH 10-year anniversary conference created an opportunity for a researcher to present at a professional association conference to advance their research by seeking consensus of statements using Delphi methodology., Methods: Conference attendees and SDMPH members who did not attend the conference were identified as Delphi experts. Experts rated their agreement of each statement on a 7- point linear numeric scale. Consensus amongst experts was defined as a standard deviation < = 1. Presenters submitted statements relevant to advancing their research to the authors to edit to fit Delphi statement formatting.Statements attaining consensus were included in the final report after the first round. Those not attaining consensus moved to the second round in which experts were shown the mean response of the expert panel and their own response for opportunity to reconsider their rating for that round. If reconsideration attained consensus, these statements were included in the final report. This process repeated in a third and final round., Results: 37 Experts agreed to participate in the first round; 35 completed the second round, and 34 completed the third round; 35 statements attained consensus; 3 statements did not attain consensus., Conclusions: A Delphi technique was used to establish expert consensus of statements submitted by the SDMPH conference presenters to guide their future education, research, and training.

Objectives: Little is known about the recent usage of pediatric telehealth across all emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. Building upon our prior work, we aimed to characterize the usage of ED pediatric telehealth in the pre-COVID-19 era. Methods: The 2019 National ED Inventory-USA survey characterized all U.S. EDs open in 2019. Among EDs reporting receipt of pediatric telehealth services, we selected a random sample ( n  = 130) for a second survey on pediatric telehealth usage (2019 ED Pediatric Telehealth Survey). We also recontacted a random sample of EDs that responded to a prior, similar 2017 ED Pediatric Telehealth Survey ( n  = 107), for a total of 237 EDs in the 2019 ED Pediatric Telehealth Survey sample. Results: Overall, 193 (81%) of the 237 EDs responded to the 2019 Pediatric Telehealth Survey. There were 149 responding EDs that confirmed pediatric telehealth receipt in 2019. Among these, few reported ever having a pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physician (10%) or pediatrician (9%) available for emergency care. Although 96% of EDs reported availability of pediatric telehealth services 24 h per day, 7 days per week, the majority (60%) reported using services less than once per month and 20% reported using services every 3-4 weeks. EDs most frequently used pediatric telehealth to assist with placement and transfer coordination (91%). Conclusions: Most EDs receiving pediatric telehealth in 2019 had no PEM physician or pediatrician available. Most EDs used pediatric telehealth services infrequently. Understanding barriers to assimilation of telehealth once adopted may be important to enable improved access to pediatric emergency care expertise.