Evidence for the Efficacy of Commercially Available Wearable Biofeedback Gait Devices: Consumer-Centered Review.

BACKGROUND: The number of wearable technological devices or sensors that are commercially available for gait training is increasing. These devices can fill a gap by extending therapy outside the clinical setting. This was shown to be important during the COVID-19 pandemic when people could not access one-on-one treatment. These devices vary widely in terms of mechanisms of therapeutic effect, as well as targeted gait parameters, availability, and strength of the evidence supporting the claims. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to create an inventory of devices targeting improvement in gait pattern and walking behavior and identify the strength of the evidence underlying the claims of effectiveness for devices that are commercially available to the public. METHODS: As there is no systematic or reproducible way to identify gait training technologies available to the public, we used a pragmatic, iterative approach using both the gray and published literature. Four approaches were used: simple words, including some suggested by laypersons; devices endorsed by condition-specific organizations or charities; impairment-specific search terms; and systematic reviews. A findable list of technological devices targeting walking was extracted separately by 3 authors. For each device identified, the evidence for efficacy was extracted from material displayed on the websites, and full-text articles were obtained from the scientific databases PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, or Google Scholar. Additional information on the target population, mechanism of feedback, evidence for efficacy or effectiveness, and commercial availability was obtained from the published material or websites. A level of evidence was assigned to each study involving the device using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification. We also proposed reporting guidelines for the clinical appraisal of devices targeting movement and mobility. RESULTS: The search strategy for this consumer-centered review yielded 17 biofeedback devices that claim to target gait quality improvement through various sensory feedback mechanisms. Of these 17 devices, 11 (65%) are commercially available, and 6 (35%) are at various stages of research and development. Of the 11 commercially available devices, 4 (36%) had findable evidence for efficacy potential supporting the claims. Most of these devices were targeted to people living with Parkinson disease. The reporting of key information about the devices was inconsistent; in addition, there was no summary of research findings in layperson's language. CONCLUSIONS: The amount of information that is currently available to the general public to help them make an informed choice is insufficient, and, at times, the information presented is misleading. The evidence supporting the effectiveness does not cover all aspects of technology uptake. Commercially available technologies help to provide continuity of therapy outside the clinical setting, but there is a need to demonstrate effectiveness to support claims made by the technologies.

Emotional distress as a trigger for PFAPA attacks

Introduction: There is scarce information regarding potential triggers for PFAPA attacks. Objectives: To examine whether an emotional stress serves as a trigger for these attacks. Methods: Active PFAPA Patients aged 3-12 years from two Israeli centers were enrolled. Patients parents were reached via phone call and asked about the occurrence of PFAPA attacks in the preceding 2 weeks of a 'stressful period' which was assumed to be (and later validated by an emotional distress scale questionnaire) within two weeks of returning to school after the first Israeli COVID-19 lockdown. Each patient served as its own control and parents were re-reached two weeks during summer break where COVID-19 outbreak was in remission (i.e. un-stressful period). The difference between occurrences of attacks during these 2 periods was recorded Results: One hundred and six pediatric patient were enrolled in the study. Mean age was 7.37± 2.9. The mean emotional distress questionnaire was higher in the first period compared to the second period (35.6± 8.1 versus 32.1± 7.7, respectively, P = 0.047). In the 'Stressful period' 41 (38.7%) reported at least 1 attack during the preceding 2 weeks compared to 24 (22.6%) in the 'unstresfull period' (p = 0.017). Conclusion: Here we provide first evidence that emotional stress may induce PFAPA attack.

Increased frequency of pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum in COVID-19 patients admitted in the ICU: A multicentre study from Mumbai, India.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data regarding the incidence of pneumothorax in COVID-19 patients as well as the impact of the same on patient outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of the medical records at three large tertiary care hospitals in Mumbai was performed to identify patients hospitalised with COVID-19 from March 2020 to October 2020. The presence of pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum was noted when chest radiographs or CT scans were performed. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients who developed air leak were recorded. RESULTS: 4,906 patients with COVID-19 were admitted, with 1,324 (27%) having severe COVID-19 disease. The overall incidence of pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum in patients with severe disease was 3.2% (42/1,324). Eighteen patients had pneumothorax, 16 had pneumomediastinum and 8 patients had both. Fourteen patients (33.3%) developed this complication breathing spontaneously, 28 patients (66.6%) developed it during mechanical ventilation. Overall mortality in this cohort was 74%, compared with 17% in the COVID-19 patients without pneumothorax (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that air leaks occur with a higher frequency in patients with COVID-19 than in other ICU patients. When present, such air leaks contributed to poor outcomes with almost 74% mortality rates in these patients.

Barriers to Use of Remote Monitoring Technologies Used to Support Patients With COVID-19: Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has acted as a catalyst for the development and adoption of a broad range of remote monitoring technologies (RMTs) in health care delivery. It is important to demonstrate how these technologies were implemented during the early stages of this pandemic to identify their application and barriers to adoption, particularly among vulnerable populations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this knowledge synthesis was to present the range of RMTs used in delivering care to patients with COVID-19 and to identify perceived benefits of and barriers to their use. The review placed a special emphasis on health equity considerations. METHODS: A rapid review of published research was conducted using Embase, MEDLINE, and QxMD for records published from the inception of COVID-19 (December 2019) to July 6, 2020. Synthesis involved content analysis of reported benefits of and barriers to the use of RMTs when delivering health care to patients with COVID-19, in addition to health equity considerations. RESULTS: Of 491 records identified, 48 publications that described 35 distinct RMTs were included in this review. RMTs included use of existing technologies (eg, videoconferencing) and development of new ones that have COVID-19-specific applications. Content analysis of perceived benefits generated 34 distinct codes describing advantages of RMTs, mapped to 10 themes overall. Further, 52 distinct codes describing barriers to use of RMTs were mapped to 18 themes. Prominent themes associated with perceived benefits included a lower burden of care (eg, for hospitals, health care practitioners; 28 records), reduced infection risk (n=33), and support for vulnerable populations (n=14). Prominent themes reflecting barriers to use of RMTs included equity-related barriers (eg, affordability of technology for users, poor internet connectivity, poor health literacy; n=16), the need for quality "best practice" guidelines for use of RMTs in clinical care (n=12), and the need for additional resources to develop and support new technologies (n=11). Overall, 23 of 48 records commented on equity characteristics that stratify health opportunities and outcomes, including general characteristics that vary over time (eg, age, comorbidities; n=17), place of residence (n=11), and socioeconomic status (n=7). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this rapid review highlight the breadth of RMTs being used to monitor and inform treatment of COVID-19, the potential benefits of using these technologies, and existing barriers to their use. Results can be used to prioritize further efforts in the implementation of RMTs (eg, developing "best practice" guidelines for use of RMTs and generating strategies to improve equitable access for marginalized populations).

Utility of mobile technology in medical interpretation: A literature review of current practices.

OBJECTIVES: Language barriers limit healthcare access. However, professional interpretation usage is infrequent due to high cost and poor interpreter availability. Healthcare-oriented mobile applications are becoming more accepted and may help alleviate this burden. This literature review aims to better understand the utility of mobile technology in healthcare interpretation. Specifically, the objective of this review is to synthesize the feasibility, outcome, and challenges of implementing technological medical interpretation services. PATIENT INVOLVEMENT: No patients were involved for this review. METHODS: In December 2019, MEDLINE (Ovid) was systematically searched according to PRISMA guidelines. All articles discussing the utility of technology in healthcare interpretation encounters were included. RESULTS: Two major themes emerged: 1) comparing video and phone interpretation with in-person interpretation and 2) assessing direct translation software in healthcare settings. Phone and video interpretation help reduce overall patient wait-times. Both patients and clinicians preferred in-person or video interpretation over interpretation by phone. Chief benefits of using direct translation software include immediate access, low costs, and sustainability. Several studies discussed potential translation inaccuracies and the importance of having professional interpreters in medico-legal discussions. CONCLUSION: Mobile applications may be used to facilitate access to medical interpreters with high clinician and patient satisfaction. Direct in-app translations facilitate access but risk inaccuracies with important medico-legal considerations. PRACTICAL VALUE: Mobile applications are available at low costs and can improve access to interpreters though video and phone calls. Mobile software can also provide direct translation and facilitate clinical care. Clinicians should prioritize face-to-face encounters with professional medical interpreters, whenever possible. In a time of social distancing amidst the current COVID-19 pandemic, there is crucial value in elucidating the best telehealth interpretation practices.