Background: In the coming years, telemedicine will play a key role in health care. Especially in rural areas with weak infrastructure, telemedicine could be crucial to providing adequate and personalized medical care. Objective: We investigated the acceptance and preferences of telemedicine among cardiologists, internists, and general practitioners. In addition, we aimed to identify knowledge, explore factors that influence the decision to adopt or reject this technology, and create starting points for demand-oriented further research. Methods: We conducted a web-based survey between May 2021 and February 2022. The 34-item questionnaire covered a wide range of questions regarding knowledge, acceptance, and use of telemedicine in cardiology care. Participants (cardiologists, internists, and general practitioners) were contacted through their professional email addresses, through a QR code published in a regional health journal, and through X (formerly known as Twitter). After exclusion of questionnaires with missed values, multidimensional scaling and k-means clustering were performed. Participants were divided into 3 clusters (C1, C2, and C3) based on their attitudes toward telecardiology. C1 uses telemedicine for personal health and clinical practice; C2 shows reluctance; C3 uses telemedicine mainly clinically. Results: We contacted 929 physicians. Of those 12.1% (112/929) completed the questionnaires. Participants were 56% male (54/97), 29% female (28/97), and 2% (2/97) diverse (median age 50 years). About 16% (18/112) of the respondents currently use telemedicine daily, 14.3% (16/112) 3-4 times a week, and 43% (48/112) did not use telemedicine at all. Overall, 35.1% (34/97) rated their knowledge of telemedicine as very good or good. Most of the respondents replied that telemedicine could support cardiology care in monitoring of blood pressure and electrocardiograms (57/97, 58.8%, both), consultation (57/97, 58.8%), and extending follow-up time (59/97, 60.8%). Reported barriers to implementation were mostly administration (26/97, 26.8%), inadequate reimbursement (25/97, 25.8%), and the purchase of technology equipment (23/97, 23.7%). Attitudes toward telemedicine in clinical practice were closely related to the number of patients being treated per annual quarter: C3 (median 1350, IQR 1000-1500) versus C1 (median 750, IQR 300-1200) and C2 (median 500, IQR 105-825). The differences between clinical caseloads of C1-C3 members were significant: C1 versus C2 (P=.03), C1 versus C3 (P=.02), and C2 versus C3 (P<.001). Most participants (87/112, 77.7%) would like to expand telemedicine approaches in the future. In the field of cardiology, the participants reported a high suitability of telemedicine. The willingness to train in telemedicine is high to very high for > 50% of the participants. Conclusions: Our results indicate generally moderate use but positive attitudes toward telemedicine among participating physicians with a higher clinical caseload. The lack of a structural framework seems to be a barrier to the effective implementation of telecardiology.

Introduction: Although transfemoral aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a safe treatment for elderly patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, postoperative microembolism has been described. In this secondary endpoint analysis of the POST-TAVR trial, we aimed to investigate whether changes in neuron-specific enolase (NSE)—a biomarker of neuronal damage—are associated with changes in memory function or postoperative delirium (POD). Materials and Methods: This was a prospective single-center study enrolling patients undergoing elective TAVR. Serum NSE was measured before and 24 h after TAVR. POD was diagnosed using CAM-ICU testing. Memory function was assessed before TAVR and before hospital discharge using the “Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease” (CERAD) word list and the digit span task (DST) implemented in “∆elta-App”. Results: Subjects’ median age was 82 years (25th to 75th percentile: 77.5–85.0), 42.6% of subjects were women. CERAD scores significantly increased from pre- to post-TAVR, with p < 0.001. POD occurred in 4.4% (6/135) of subjects at median 2 days after TAVR. After TAVR, NSE increased from a median of 1.85 ng/mL (1.30–2.53) to 2.37 ng/mL (1.69–3.07), p < 0.001. The median increase in NSE was 40.4% (13.1–138.0) in patients with POD versus 17.3% (3.3–43.4) in those without POD (p = 0.17). Conclusions: Memory function improved after TAVR, likely due to learning effects, with no association to change in NSE. Patients with POD appear to have significantly higher postoperative levels of NSE compared to patients without POD after TAVR. This finding suggests that neuronal damage, as indicated by NSE elevation, may not significantly impair assessed memory function after TAVR.

Clinical knowledge, group facilitation skills, and cognitive congruence are considered important factors for the successful tutoring of Problem Based Learning sessions. In addition, the theory of Community of Practice has become an important tool to approach social learning and knowledge integration in medical education and organizational studies. More research is needed to link these two strands of research. We look at novice medical students’ experiences and comparative reflections on student-tutors and clinician-tutors as facilitators of PBL sessions in a participatory, randomized cross-over design. Qualitative methodologies were used to probe the experiences of participants. In this study, the main factor for successful PBL sessions for first-year students was the creation of a non-hierarchical learning atmosphere, which starkly differentiated itself from the rigidity of a PBL structure organized around clinician-tutors and their hierarchically-imparted knowledge. In contrast, a more flexible strategy of student tutors and their constructive management of “not-knowing” enabled novice students to take steps on their own — of which they were highly appreciative, stressing how it allowed them to develop earlier autonomy with regard to PBL methodology, manage uncertainty, and create a shared identity as a community of learners.

Aim: The impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) on patient-related outcomes in patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is well known. However, the impact of the progression of CKD in patients with TR and potentially modifiable risk factors of progressing CKD is unknown. Methods: 444 consecutive adult patients with TR and CKD stage 1–4 admitted in an inpatient setting between January 2010 and December 2017 were included. During a median follow-up of two years, eGFR and survival status were collected. Independent risk factors for CKD progression and all-cause mortality were determined. Patient survival statuses were grouped according to different combinations of the presence or absence of CKD progression and the TR grade. Results: Progression of CKD (OR 2.38 (95% confidence interval 1.30–4.35), p = 0.005), the grade of TR (OR 2.38 (1.41–4.00), p = 0.001) and mitral regurgitation (OR 1.72 (1.20–2.46), p = 0.003) were independent risk factors for all-cause mortality. Haemoglobin at admission (OR 0.80 (0.65–0.99), p = 0.043) and the presence of type 2 diabetes (OR 1.67 (1.02–2.73), p = 0.042) were independent risk factors for CKD progression. The combination of the status of CKD progression and the TR grade showed a stepwise pattern for all-cause mortality (p < 0.001). Patients with CKD progression and TR grade 1 had comparable all-cause mortality with patients without CKD progression but with TR grade 2 or 3. Even in patients with TR grade 1, the risk for all-cause mortality doubled if CKD progression occurred (OR 2.49 (95% CI 1.38–4.47), p = 0.002). Conclusion: CKD progression appears to be a risk factor for all-cause mortality in patients with TR. Anaemia and diabetes are potential modifiers of CKD progression.

Background: Semi-automated software is essential for planning and prosthesis selection prior transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Reliable data on the usability of software programs for planning a TAVR is missing. The aim of this study was to compare software programs ‘Valve Assist 2’ (GE Healthcare) and 3mensio ‘Structural Heart’ (Pie Medical Imaging) regarding usability and accuracy of prosthesis size selection in program-inexperienced users. Methods: Thirty-one participants (n = 31) were recruited and divided into program-inexperienced users (beginners) (n = 22) and experts (n = 9). After software training, beginners evaluated 3 patient cases in 129 measurements (n = 129) using either Valve Assist 2 (n = 11) or Structural Heart (n = 11) on 2 test days (T1, T2). System Usability Scale (SUS) and ISONORM 9241/110-S (ISONORM) questionnaire were used after the test. The valve size selected by each beginner was compared with the valve size selected from expert group. Results: Valve Assist 2 had higher SUS Score: median 78.75 (25th, 75th percentile: 67.50, 85.00) compared to Structural Heart: median 65.00 (25th, 75th percentile: 47.50, 73.75), (p < 0,001, r = 0.557). Also, Valve Assist 2 showed a higher ISONORM score: median 1.05 (25th, 75th percentile: − 0.19, 1.71) compared to Structural Heart with a median 0.05 (25th, 75th percentile: − 0.49, 0.13), (p = 0.036, r = 0.454). Correctly selected valve sizes were stable over time using Valve Assist 2: 72.73% to 69.70% compared to Structural Heart program: 93.94% to 40% (χ² (1) = 21.10, p < 0.001, φ = 0.579). Conclusion: The study shows significant better usability scores for Valve Assist 2 compared to 3mensio Structural Heart in program-inexperienced users.

Observational data demonstrate a gap between prescribed and achieved mean arterial pressure (MAP) targets in critically ill patients receiving vasopressor therapy, with delivered MAP values consistently 7-10 mmHg higher than prescribed targets. The mechanisms underlying this discrepancy remain poorly understood, particularly the role of bedside nursing practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate bedside nursing practices, attitudes, and perceived barriers related to vasopressor management and MAP targeting and to identify nursing-related factors contributing to the observed gap between prescribed and achieved MAP values. A multicentre, cross-sectional mixed-method survey study was conducted at three tertiary intensive care units (ICUs) in Australia and New Zealand between May and August 2025. The electronic survey examined alarm-setting practices, clinical decision-making factors, tolerance for subtarget MAP values, and attitudes towards MAP management strategies. Eligible participants were ICU nurses with direct patient care responsibilities. A total of 278 ICU nurses responded across three sites. Most nurses (72.0%) frequently cared for patients receiving vasopressors on ≥50% of shifts. For MAP targets of 60, 65, and 70 mmHg, nurses set lower alarm limits at medians of 59, 63, and 68 mmHg, respectively, while upper alarm limits were set 15-20 mmHg above prescribed targets. Nurses demonstrated limited tolerance for subtarget MAP values, accepting deviations for median durations of only 3-5 min. Patient instability was the most frequently cited factor influencing titration decisions (86.0%). While 57.9% of nurses were comfortable with achieving a higher MAP than prescribed, 89.6% were comfortable decreasing vasopressor doses to correct this situation. Strong support existed for educational interventions (91.4%) and standardised protocols (71.7%). Thematic analysis identified four barrier themes: patient responses, clinical uncertainty, multidisciplinary influences, and factors impacting practice. Liberal upper alarm limits set 15-20 mmHg above prescribed MAP targets, combined with brief tolerance for subtarget values, create asymmetric management practices that systematically enable upward MAP drift and explain the persistent gap between prescribed and achieved targets.