Designing Digital COVID-19 Screening: Insights and Deliberations.

Due to the global COVID-19 pandemic, public health control and screening measures have been introduced at healthcare facilities, including those housing our most vulnerable populations. These warning measures situated at hospital entrances are presently labour-intensive, requiring additional staff to conduct manual temperature checks and risk-assessment questionnaires of every individual entering the premises. To make this process more efficient, we present eGate, a digital COVID-19 health-screening smart Internet of Things system deployed at multiple entry points around a children's hospital. This paper reports on design insights based on the experiences of concierge screening staff stationed alongside the eGate system. Our work contributes towards social-technical deliberations on how to improve design and deploy of digital health-screening systems in hospitals. It specifically outlines a series of design recommendations for future health screening interventions, key considerations relevant to digital screening control systems and their implementation, and the plausible effects on the staff who work alongside them.

Nurse, Give Me the News! Understanding Support for and Opposition to a COVID-19 Health Screening System.

Helping the sick and protecting the vulnerable has long been the credo of the health profession. In response to the coronavirus-disease-2019 (COVID-19 pandemic), hospitals and healthcare institutions have rapidly employed public health measures to mitigate patient and staff infection. This paper investigates staff and visitor responses to the COVID-19 eGate health screening system; a self-service technology (SST) which aims to protect health care workers and facilities from COVID-19. Our study evaluates the in situ deployment of the eGate, and employs a System Usability Scale (SUS) and questionnaire (n = 220) to understand staff and visitor's acceptance of the eGate. In detailing the themes relevant to those who advocate for the system and those who oppose it, we contribute towards a more detailed understanding of the use and non-use of health-screening SSTs. We conclude with a series of considerations for the design of future interactive screening systems within hospitals.

Do interoception and attending to the upper limbs affect body ownership and body representation in the grasp illusion?

Passively grasping an unseen artificial finger induces ownership over this finger and an illusory coming together of one's index fingers: a grasp illusion. Here we determine how interoceptive ability and attending to the upper limbs influence this illusion. Participants passively grasped an unseen artificial finger with their left index finger and thumb for 3 min while their right index finger, located 12 cm below, was lightly clamped. Experiment 1 (n = 30) investigated whether the strength of the grasp illusion (perceived index finger spacing and perceived ownership) is related to a person's level of interoceptive accuracy (modified heartbeat counting task) and sensibility (Noticing subscale of the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness). Experiment 2 (n = 30) investigated the effect of providing verbal or tactile cues to guide participants' attention to their upper limbs. On their own, neither interoceptive accuracy and sensibility or verbal and tactile cueing had an effect on the grasp illusion. However, verbal cueing increased the strength of the grasp illusion in individuals with lower interoceptive ability. Across the observed range of interoceptive accuracy and sensibility, verbal cueing decreased perceived index spacing by 5.6 cm [1.91 to 9.38] (mean [95%CI]), and perceived ownership by ∼3 points on a 7-point Likert scale (slope -0.93 [-1.72 to -0.15]). Thus, attending to the upper limbs via verbal cues increases the strength of the grasp illusion in a way that is inversely proportional to a person's level of interoceptive accuracy and sensibility.

Fine-Grained Mapping of Cortical Somatotopies in Chronic Complex Regional Pain Syndrome.

It has long been thought that severe chronic pain conditions, such as complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), are not only associated with, but even maintained by a reorganization of the somatotopic representation of the affected limb in primary somatosensory cortex (S1). This notion has driven treatments that aim to restore S1 representations in CRPS patients, such as sensory discrimination training and mirror therapy. However, this notion is based on both indirect and incomplete evidence obtained with imaging methods with low spatial resolution. Here, we used fMRI to characterize the S1 representation of the affected and unaffected hand in humans (of either sex) with unilateral CRPS. The cortical area, location, and geometry of the S1 representation of the CRPS hand were largely comparable with those of both the unaffected hand and healthy controls. We found no differential relation between affected versus unaffected hand map measures and clinical measures (pain severity, upper limb disability, disease duration). Thus, if any map reorganization occurs, it does not appear to be directly related to pain and disease severity. These findings compel us to reconsider the cortical mechanisms underlying CRPS and the rationale for interventions that aim to "restore" somatotopic representations to treat pain.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT This study shows that the spatial map of the fingers in somatosensory cortex is largely preserved in chronic complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). These findings challenge the treatment rationale for restoring somatotopic representations in complex regional pain syndrome patients.

A Novel Finger Illusion Reveals Reduced Weighting of Bimanual Hand Cortical Representations in People With Complex Regional Pain Syndrome.

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is associated with deficits in sensorimotor control. Herein we have used a novel finger illusion to investigate whether CRPS is associated with reduced weighting of bimanual hand representations. The illusion normally induces a compelling feeling that the hands are close together when in fact they are 12 cm apart. People with CRPS and age, gender, and dominant hand-matched controls tested the illusion in the midline then on either side of the midline. The illusion had 2 variants; the passive pincer-grip position, without contact (no grasp condition) and with contact (grasp condition) of the artificial finger. The primary outcome was the perceived vertical distance between the index fingers. Twenty people with CRPS and 20 controls participated (mean age 44.4 ± 11.7 years). During the no grasp condition, participants with CRPS perceived the vertical distance significantly closer to the actual 12 cm (mean 8.0 cm, 95% confidence interval 6.5-9.5 cm), than controls did (mean 6.4 cm, 95% confidence interval 5.5-7.2 cm]). That is, the illusion was weaker in people with CRPS than in controls during no grasp. There was no such difference during grasp; that is, both groups showed the predicted illusion response. There was no effect of hand placement relative to midline or relative to the opposite hand. We conclude that people with unilateral CRPS have lower weighting of bimanual hand representation than controls have, independent of hand location. However, adding additional cutaneous input returns those with CRPS to the expected performance. We suggest the results have clear clinical and research implications. PERSPECTIVE: An abnormal weighting of bilateral hand representation may reflect a vulnerability for chronic CRPS, an adaptation to the disease, and/or a potential therapeutic target. That addition of cutaneous input immediately normalizes the problem points to the possible role of bimanual tasks in prevention or rehabilitation.