Multimodal Remote Home Monitoring of Lung Transplant Recipients during COVID-19 Vaccinations: Usability Pilot Study of the COVIDA Desk Incorporating Wearable Devices.

Background and Objectives: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) of vital signs and symptoms for lung transplant recipients (LTRs) has become increasingly relevant in many situations. Nevertheless, RPM research integrating multisensory home monitoring in LTRs is scarce. We developed a novel multisensory home monitoring device and tested it in the context of COVID-19 vaccinations. We hypothesize that multisensory RPM and smartphone-based questionnaire feedback on signs and symptoms will be well accepted among LTRs. To assess the usability and acceptability of a remote monitoring system consisting of wearable devices, including home spirometry and a smartphone-based questionnaire application for symptom and vital sign monitoring using wearable devices, during the first and second SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Materials and Methods: Observational usability pilot study for six weeks of home monitoring with the COVIDA Desk for LTRs. During the first week after the vaccination, intensive monitoring was performed by recording data on physical activity, spirometry, temperature, pulse oximetry and self-reported symptoms, signs and additional measurements. During the subsequent days, the number of monitoring assessments was reduced. LTRs reported on their perceptions of the usability of the monitoring device through a purpose-designed questionnaire. Results: Ten LTRs planning to receive the first COVID-19 vaccinations were recruited. For the intensive monitoring study phase, LTRs recorded symptoms, signs and additional measurements. The most frequent adverse events reported were local pain, fatigue, sleep disturbance and headache. The duration of these symptoms was 5-8 days post-vaccination. Adherence to the main monitoring devices was high. LTRs rated usability as high. The majority were willing to continue monitoring. Conclusions: The COVIDA Desk showed favorable technical performance and was well accepted by the LTRs during the vaccination phase of the pandemic. The feasibility of the RPM system deployment was proven by the rapid recruitment uptake, technical performance (i.e., low number of errors), favorable user experience questionnaires and detailed individual user feedback.

Prescribing practices of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin during the COVID-19 epidemic crisis and pharmaceutical interventions in a French teaching hospital.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to describe prescribing practices of lopinavir/ritonavir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin during the COVID-19 epidemic crisis (primary endpoint), then to characterise pharmaceutical interventions (PIs) targeted to these medications and evaluate the impact of these PIs on prescribers' practices (secondary end-points). METHODS: This retrospective observational study was carried out at the University Hospital of Strasbourg (France) from March to April 2020. The analysed population excluded patients from intensive care units but included all other adult patients with COVID-19 who received at least one dose of lopinavir/ritonavir combination, hydroxychloroquine or azithromycin, while inpatients. Analyses were performed by using data extracted from electronic medical records. RESULT: During the study period, 278 patients were included. A rapid decrease in lopinavir/ritonavir prescriptions was observed. This was accompanied by an increase in hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin prescriptions until the end of March, followed by a decrease leading to the disappearance of these two medications in April. The pharmaceutical analysis of the prescriptions resulted in 59 PIs of which 21 were associated with lopinavir/ritonavir, 32 with hydroxychloroquine and 6 with azithromycin. Regarding the medication-related problems, the most frequent ones were incorrect treatment durations (n=32 (54.2%)), drug interactions with potential torsadogenic reactions (n=14 (23.7%)) and incorrect dosing (n=6 (10.2%)). From the 59 PIs, 48 (81.4%) were accepted and physicians adjusted the medication regimens in a timely manner. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the value-even more meaningful in a crisis situation-of a strong synergy between physicians and pharmacists for patient-safety focused practices.