A Participatory Design Methodology to Elicit Aging- in-Place Stakeholder Concerns with Ambient Assistive Living (AAL) Devices During COVID-19

For varying reasons, our world is experiencing increasing life expectancies and decreasing birth rates, which has led to a generational shift in population distribution. The Government of Canada predicts that in the year 2030, over 9.5 million (23%) Canadians will be 65 years or older. For this growing demographic of older adults, intelligent home health technologies have been proposed as one beneficial avenue to support and maintain an individual's health and wellness as they begin experiencing aging-related health effects. However, many ethical concerns have been raised regarding the design and deployment of intelligent home healthcare technologies in aging- in-place settings such as long-term care and nursing homes. This paper presents a revised participatory design methodology to identify aging-in-place stakeholders' ethical concerns with two Ambient Assistive Living (AAL) devices. The main objective of this paper is to develop and test a participatory design research method that is well suited for older adults living in long-term care settings, which is currently lacking. Developed by an interdisciplinary team of engineers and social science researchers, this paper presents the participatory method that was designed and tested in a long-term care facility by collaborating with a mix of aging-in-place stakeholders, including older adults and healthcare professionals. By interweaving interactive activities, hand-written tasks, and discussions throughout the data collection process, the methodology successfully identified stakeholders' ethical concerns with the devices. © 2022 IEEE.

Combining cell therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Back to no future?

Introduction: After more than 50 years of research we are yet to develop an effective treatment for the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS). This stands in contrast to the advances made in supportive care, a prime example of which is the maturation of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO). While technologies such as ECMO 'buy time' for recovery, the identification of a therapy remains crucial to improving outcomes. Recently, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have shown promise as a novel treatment.1 Importantly, cell therapy may represent a means to overcome the hurdles associated with successful pharmacological intervention in ARDS. Little is known about the interaction between cell therapy and ECMO. This is a deficiency, given that those receiving ECMO for ARDS are among the most severely ill and therefore most likely to benefit. This programme of work was designed to close that gap. Objectives: Using a translational pipeline, our objective was to assess the safety and efficacy of MSCs during ECMO for ARDS. Methods: We employed several diverse methods to address our objectives, including an ex-vivo ECMO simulation, complex sheep models of ARDS and ARDS and venovenous ECMO, systematic review methodology, and unsupervised machine learning techniques. Results: In our ex-vivo model, we were the first to demonstrate potential harms associated with MSC therapy during ECMO.2 When 40 × 10∧6 clinical-grade human MSCs (Cynata Therapeutics Ltd., Australia) were added to fresh whole human blood and subjected to extracorporeal circulation using commercial components, oxygenator and pump performance was severely impaired within 4 hours. These experiments also demonstrated benefits associated with MSCs, including trends toward lower inflammatory cytokine concentrations and less neutrophil activation.3 To validate our findings, we sought to test hMSCs in a clinicallyrelevant sheep model. At the outset we undertook a systematic review of existing pre-clinical models of ARDS and ECMO.4 This has since produced an international collaborative effort to characterise pre-clinical models of ECMO across a range of indications. We subsequently described a 'double-hit' model of ARDS which combines oleic acid and intra-tracheal E. coli lipopolysaccharide. Using cluster analysis, we showed that this model shares qualitative similarities with the 'hypo-inflammatory' phenotype identified in clinical cohorts [Millar JE et al. Physiological Reports 2021. In Press]. Finally, in a 24-hour model, combining our novel injury method, VV-ECMO, and best practice ventilatory and supportive care, we performed a controlled trial of intra-tracheal hMSC therapy5 [Editorial: Del Sorbo L, Fan E. AJRCCM 2020]. This study showed that hMSCs reduce histological evidence of lung injury and ameliorate shock. However, hMSC-mediated impairment of oxygenator function was evident again. Conclusion: This work addresses a gap in our understanding of cell therapy in critical illness. The findings are of direct clinical relevance, highlighting the potential harms of cell therapy during extracorporeal circulation. With a recent explosion in the number of registered clinical trials of MSCs for severe COVID-19 in mind, the use of MSCs during ECMO cannot be recommended.

An appraisal of respiratory system compliance in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients

Rationale Heterogeneous respiratory system static compliance (CRS) values and levels of hypoxemia in patients with novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) requiring mechanical ventilation have been reported in previous smallcase series or studies conducted at a national level.Methods We designed a retrospective observational cohort study with rapid data gathering from the international COVID-19 Critical Care Consortium study to comprehensively describe the impact of CRS on the ventilatory management and outcomes of COVID-19 patients on mechanical ventilation (MV), admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide.Results We enrolled 318 COVID-19 patients enrolled into the study from January 14th through September 31th, 2020 in 19 countries and stratified into two CRS groups. CRS was calculated as: tidal volume/[airway plateau pressure-positive endexpiratory pressure (PEEP)] and available within 48h from commencement of MV in 318 patients. Patients were mean±SD of 58.0±12.2, predominantly from Europe (54%) and males (68%). Median CRS (IQR) was 34.1 mL/cmH2O (26.5-45.5) and PaO2/FiO2 was 119 mmHg (87.1-164) and was not correlated with CRS. Female sex presented lower CRS than in males (95% CI:-13.8 to-8.5 P<0.001) and higher body mass index (34.7±10.9 vs 29.1±6.0, p<0.001). Median (IQR) PEEP was 12 cmH2O (10-15), throughout the range of CRS, while median (IQR) driving pressure was 12.3 (10-15) cmH2O and significantly decreased as CRS improved (p<0.001). No differences were found in comorbidities and clinical management between CRS strata. In addition, 28-day ICU mortality and hospital mortality did not differ between CRSgroups.Conclusions This multicentre report provides a comprehensive account of CRS in COVID-19 patients on MV-predominantly males or overweight females, in their late 50s-admitted to ICU during the first international outbreaks. Phenotypes associated with different CRS upon commencement of MV could not be identified.