We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
We reviewed outcomes in all 36 consecutive children <5 kg supported with the Berlin Heart pulsatile ventricular assist device at the University of Florida, comparing those with acquired heart disease (n = 8) to those with congenital heart disease (CHD) (n = 28).
The primary outcome was mortality. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests were used to assess group differences in long-term survival after ventricular assist device insertion. T-tests using estimated survival proportions were used to compare groups at specific time points.
Of 82 patients supported with the Berlin Heart at our institution, 49 (49/82 = 59.76%) weighed <10 kg and 36 (36/82 = 43.90%) weighed <5 kg. Of 36 patients <5 kg, 26 (26/36 = 72.22%) were successfully bridged to transplantation. (The duration of support with ventricular assist device for these 36 patients <5 kg was [days]: median = 109, range = 4–305.) Eight out of 36 patients <5 kg had acquired heart disease, and all eight [8/8 = 100%] were successfully bridged to transplantation. (The duration of support with ventricular assist device for these 8 patients <5 kg with acquired heart disease was [days]: median = 50, range = 9–130.) Twenty-eight of 36 patients <5 kg had congenital heart disease. Eighteen of these 28 [64.3%] were successfully bridged to transplantation. (The duration of support with ventricular assist device for these 28 patients <5 kg with congenital heart disease was [days]: median = 136, range = 4–305.) For all 36 patients who weighed <5 kg: 1-year survival estimate after ventricular assist device insertion = 62.7% (95% confidence interval = 48.5–81.2%) and 5-year survival estimate after ventricular assist device insertion = 58.5% (95% confidence interval = 43.8–78.3%). One-year survival after ventricular assist device insertion = 87.5% (95% confidence interval = 67.3–99.9%) in acquired heart disease and 55.6% (95% confidence interval = 39.5–78.2%) in CHD, P = 0.036. Five-year survival after ventricular assist device insertion = 87.5% (95% confidence interval = 67.3–99.9%) in acquired heart disease and 48.6% (95% confidence interval = 31.6–74.8%) in CHD, P = 0.014.
Pulsatile ventricular assist device facilitates bridge to transplantation in neonates and infants weighing <5 kg; however, survival after ventricular assist device insertion in these small patients is less in those with CHD in comparison to those with acquired heart disease.
Background: Simulations based on models of healthcare worker (HCW) mobility and contact patterns with patients provide a key tool for understanding spread of healthcare-acquired infections (HAIs). However, simulations suffer from lack of accurate model parameters. This research uses Microsoft Kinect cameras placed in a patient room in the medical intensive care unit (MICU) at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (UIHC) to obtain reliable distributions of HCW visit length and time spent by HCWs near a patient. These data can inform modeling efforts for understanding HAI spread. Methods: Three Kinect cameras (left, right, and door cameras) were placed in a patient room to track the human body (ie, left/right hands and head) at 30 frames per second. The results reported here are based on 7 randomly selected days from a total of 308 observation days. Each tracked body may have multiple raw segments over the 2 camera regions, which we “stitch” up by matching features (eg, direction, velocity, etc), to obtain complete trajectories. Due to camera noise, in a substantial fraction of the frames bodies display unnatural characteristics including frequent and rapid directional and velocity change. We use unsupervised learning techniques to identify such “ghost” frames and we remove from our analysis bodies that have 20% or more “ghost” frames. Results: The heat map of hand positions (Fig. 1) shows that high-frequency locations are clustered around the bed and more to the patient’s right in accordance with the general medical practice of performing patient exams from their right. HCW visit frequency per hour (mean, 6.952; SD, 2.855) has 2 peaks, 1 during morning shift and 1 during the afternoon shift, with a distinct decrease after midnight. Figure 2 shows visit length (in minutes) distribution (mean, 1.570; SD, 2.679) being dominated by “check in visits” of <30 seconds. HCWs do not spend much time at touching distance from patients during short-length visits, and the fraction of time spent near the patient’s bed seems to increase with visit length up to a point. Conclusions: Using fine-grained data, this research extracts distributions of these critical parameters of HCW–patient interactions: (1) HCW visit length, (2) HCW visit frequency as a function of time of day, and (3) time spent by HCW within touching distance of patient as a function of visit length. To the best of our knowledge, we provide the first reliable estimates of these parameters.
Funding: None
Disclosures: None
Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the evidence that reuse of medical devices marketed for single use only (SUDs) is safe, effective and cost-effective, and to consider the use and health services impact of this practice in Canada.
Methods: A systematic review was performed of studies that reported clinical or economic outcomes following reuse of SUDs in humans. Direct costs of adverse health events associated with SUD reuse and indications of budget impact were obtained using data for devices for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and coronary angioplasty. Legal and ethical issues were reviewed, drawing on material relevant to Canada. Data on current reuse of SUDs were obtained through a survey of Canadian acute care hospitals.
Results: Studies of variable quality suggested that SUD reuse could be safe and effective, and would give cost savings, if there were no adverse events. Eliminating reuse of SUDs for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and coronary angioplasty would add less than 0.1 percent to costs of the procedures over 1 year. Adverse health events associated with device reuse create liability risks; patients should be informed of any known or foreseeable risks of reuse. Most of the 28 percent (111/398) of acute hospitals that reprocess SUDs do so in-house. Some do not have a written policy or an incident reporting mechanism.
Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to establish the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of reusing SUDs. Legal and ethical issues require attention to minimize liability and maintain patient safety and trust. Some hospitals that reprocess SUDs do not have adequate documentation. These findings do not support the reuse of SUDs in Canadian hospitals.