Portal use has been studied among outpatients, but its utility and impact on inpatients is unclear. This study describes portal adoption and use among hospitalized cancer patients and investigates associations with selected safety, utilization, and satisfaction measures. A retrospective review of 4594 adult hospitalized cancer patients was conducted between 2012 and 2014 at Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida, comparing portal adopters, who registered for a portal account prior to hospitalization, with nonadopters. Adopters were classified by their portal activity during hospitalization as active or inactive inpatient users. Univariate and several logistic and linear regression models were used for analysis. Of total patients, 2352 (51.2%) were portal adopters, and of them, 632 (26.8%) were active inpatient users. Portal adoption was associated with patients who were young, female, married, with higher income, and had more frequent hospitalizations (P < .05). Active inpatient use was associated with patients who were young, married, nonlocals, with higher disease severity, and were hospitalized for medical treatment (P < .05). In univariate analyses, self-management knowledge scores were higher among adopters vs nonadopters (84.3 and 80.0, respectively; P = .01) and among active vs inactive inpatient users (87.0 and 83.3, respectively; P = .04). In regression models adjusted for age and disease severity, the association between portal behaviors and majority of measures were not significant (P > .05). Over half of our cancer inpatients adopted a portal prior to hospitalization, with increased adoption associated with predisposing and enabling determinants (eg: age, sex, marital status, income), and increased inpatient use associated with need (eg: nonlocal residence and disease severity). Additional research and greater effort to expand the portal functionality is needed to impact inpatient outcomes.

To determine whether use of a patient portal during hospitalization is associated with improvement in hospital outcomes, 30-day readmissions, inpatient mortality, and 30-day mortality. We performed a retrospective propensity score–matched study that included all adult patients admitted to Mayo Clinic Hospital in Jacksonville, Florida, from August 1, 2012, to July 31, 2014, who had signed up for a patient portal account prior to hospitalization (N = 7538). Out of the admitted patients with a portal account, 1566 (20.8%) accessed the portal while in the hospital. Compared to patients who did not access the portal, patients who accessed the portal were younger (58.8 years vs 62.3 years), had fewer elective admissions (54.2% vs 64.1%), were more frequently admitted to medical services (45.8% vs 35.2%), and were more likely to have liver disease (21.9% vs 12.9%) and higher disease severity scores (0.653 vs 0.456). After propensity score matching, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 cohorts with respect to 30-day readmission (P = .13), inpatient mortality (P = .82), or 30-day mortality (P = .082). Use of the patient portal in the inpatient setting may not improve hospital outcomes. Future research should examine the association of portal use with more immediate inpatient health outcomes such as patient experience, patient engagement, medication reconciliation, and prevention of adverse events.

Dove Press is a member of the Open Access Initiative, specializing in peer reviewed Medical Journals. View articlesor submit your research for publishing

Higher education institutions (HEIs) shifted from in-person attendance to blended and online learning due to the COVID-19 lockdowns. This study investigated the students' perception of satisfaction, convenience, engagement, and learning towards blended and online courses conducted before, during, and after the COVID-19 lockdowns. A longitudinal study design was adopted to examine the students' perception of online and blended learning courses before, during, and after the COVID-19 lockdowns. The subjects consist of Health science students (N = 130) belonging to two different colleges of a public university and the study period includes three academic years (i.e., six semesters) (2018–2021). A survey tool was developed to collect data from students studying the computer fundamentals course through blended and online learning modes from 2018 to 2021. Over 95% of students have been satisfied with the course offered through various blended learning formats since 2018. The blended 0.50-course format is the most preferred one for the students; however, the Blended 0.75-course format is highly rated by the students regarding their satisfaction and engagement than other learning formats during the COVID-19 lockdowns. Following adaption after COVID-19, the students reported a high perception of learning towards the course when delivered through 100% online learning mode. Students' achievement is significantly associated with the learning modes, exam modes, and various student batches. The blended 0.75-course format group shows a higher achievement than the other three-course format groups. Likewise, those students who appeared in their exams online showed higher achievement than those who appeared physically. Further, the students felt equally convenient with Blended 0.75 and 100% online learning course formats. These findings would also help HEIs choose appropriate learning and examination modes while designing courses.

Background: Managing the safety climate in health care is a promising tool for improving employee and patient safety in the health care work environment. Gaps in the theoretical and conceptual underpinnings of safety climate, as well as the evidence base for its practical application in health care remain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the number of work injuries occurring in health care work units and associated safety climate beliefs. Method: A retrospective analysis was conducted utilizing organizational staff survey data collected by a large medical hospital in the Midwest in 2015. Employees (n = 32,327) were invited to identify safety climate perceptions via survey. Injuries, days restricted, and days absent were identified through the Hospital’s Department of Occupational Safety and Health Administration record. Zero Inflated Negative Binominal regressions used injuries as dependent variables and safety climate perceptions as independent variables. Findings: In all, 23,599 employees completed the survey (73% response rate) across 1,805 employee work units which were defined as groupings of employees reporting to a single supervisor. We found that there was an association between fewer injuries and health care workers indicating that they share responsibility for compliance with safety rules and procedures (relative risk [RR] = 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.98, 0.99]). Conclusion/Application to Practice: This study supports the use of a safety climate measure to assess working units’ perception of employee safety. A continued focus on the health and safety of employees who interact directly with patients is warranted, as well as employees who do not provide direct patient care.

Background: The objective of this study was to investigate the knowledge and attitudes of Saudi Arabian citizens towards telemedicine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.Methods: A cross-sectional survey was designed to carry out this study. The electronic survey, prepared using Google Forms, was distributed to 1500 randomly selected citizens of Saudi Arabia. A total of 330 participants completed and returned the questionnaire. Basic statistics were used to describe the data.Results: The majority of the respondents (73.9%) were female. More than half of them (54.8%) were >35 y of age and had graduate or postgraduate degrees (65.5%). A total of 96.7% of the respondents were Saudis. Most of the participants (70.0%) were familiar with the term ‘telemedicine’ and thought that telemedicine (92.1%) could reduce transportation costs. Of the respondents, 58.8% had not seen a telemedicine system before and 67.0% indicated that they had not previously used telemedicine services. A total of 87.3% of the participants agreed or strongly agreed that telemedicine was a useful tool during the COVID-19 pandemic. Also, more than half of the participants agreed or strongly agreed that telemedicine facilitates the diagnosis of people (58.8%), increases communication (58.2%), reduces clinic visits (85.9%) and performs tasks quickly (70.3%). Also, 51.5% of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed that telemedicine affects patient privacy.Conclusions: The outcomes indicated that most of the participants had a positive attitude towards the use of telemedicine as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia. They believed that telemedicine saves time, labour and costs and is an effective tool to treat coronavirus patients at a safe distance. However, the government should develop programs to raise awareness in the population about the use of telemedicine for the treatment of various diseases that afflict the Saudi Arabian people. Likewise, a legal framework must be implemented to protect the privacy of patients and healthcare providers.