Objectives: Traditional hospital at home models often have high patient experience scores. The purpose of this study is to look at the patient experience of a new virtual hybrid model of hospital at home called Advanced Care at Home. Methods: Patients in Mayo Clinic’s Advanced Care at Home program received a survey via email from 1 January–31 May 2021. Each survey consisted of 20 questions divided into 18 multiple-choice and two open-ended questions. Results: Ninety-nine surveys were sent and 41 partially or completely finished surveys were returned for a response rate of 41.4%. Patients responded positively, denoted by answering “strongly agree or somewhat agree,” with regard to the ability to reach the team right away 100% of the time, being kept informed 92% of the time, the command center responding promptly to their needs 95% of the time, the team providing comfort and support 98% of the time, feeling comfortable with interacting with their provider by phone or tablet 95% of the time, the ease of use from the equipment 97% of the time, the virtual and in-person staff working well together 98% of the time, the staff treating patients with courtesy and respect 100% of the time, and the ease of understanding the discharge process and feeling ready to leave the program 100% of the time. All providers received positive responses on listening ⩾88% of the time. Patients gave a top rating in likelihood to recommend the program 100% of the time. Conclusion: Overall, the Advanced Care at Home model of hospital at home was highly recommended by patients. Patients scored the program high on responsiveness, staff engagement and communication, ease of equipment use, and readiness for discharge, strengthening the overall confidence in this novel program.

Pain is a complex and subjective experience, and traditional methods of pain assessment can be limited by factors such as self-report bias and observer variability. Voice is frequently used to evaluate pain, occasionally in conjunction with other behaviors such as facial gestures. Compared to facial emotions, there is less available evidence linking pain with voice. This literature review synthesizes the current state of research on the use of voice recognition and voice analysis for pain detection in adults, with a specific focus on the role of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) techniques. We describe the previous works on pain recognition using voice and highlight the different approaches to voice as a tool for pain detection, such as a human effect or biosignal. Overall, studies have shown that AI-based voice analysis can be an effective tool for pain detection in adult patients with various types of pain, including chronic and acute pain. We highlight the high accuracy of the ML-based approaches used in studies and their limitations in terms of generalizability due to factors such as the nature of the pain and patient population characteristics. However, there are still potential challenges, such as the need for large datasets and the risk of bias in training models, which warrant further research.

Background: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is an option for continuously managing the care of patients in the comfort of their homes or locations outside hospitals and clinics. Patient engagement with RPM programs is essential for achieving successful outcomes and high quality of care. When relying on technology to facilitate monitoring and shifting disease management to the home environment, it is important to understand the patients’ experiences to enable quality improvement. Objective: This study aimed to describe patients’ experiences and overall satisfaction with an RPM program for acute and chronic conditions in a multisite, multiregional health care system. Methods: Between January 1, 2021, and August 31, 2022, a patient experience survey was delivered via email to all patients enrolled in the RPM program. The survey encompassed 19 questions across 4 categories regarding comfort, equipment, communication, and overall experience, as well as 2 open-ended questions. Descriptive analysis of the survey response data was performed using frequency distribution and percentages. Results: Surveys were sent to 8535 patients. The survey response rate was 37.16% (3172/8535) and the completion rate was 95.23% (3172/3331). Survey results indicated that 88.97% (2783/3128) of participants agreed or strongly agreed that the program helped them feel comfortable managing their health from home. Furthermore, 93.58% (2873/3070) were satisfied with the RPM program and ready to graduate when meeting the program goals. In addition, patient confidence in this model of care was confirmed by 92.76% (2846/3068) of the participants who would recommend RPM to people with similar conditions. There were no differences in ease of technology use according to age. Those with high school or less education were more likely to agree that the equipment and educational materials helped them feel more informed about their care plans than those with higher education levels. Conclusions: This multisite, multiregional RPM program has become a reliable health care delivery model for the management of acute and chronic conditions outside hospitals and clinics. Program participants reported an excellent overall experience and a high level of satisfaction in managing their health from the comfort of their home environment.

Background and Objective: Telemedicine and video consultation are crucial advancements in healthcare, allowing remote delivery of care. Telemedicine, encompassing various technologies like wearable devices, mobile health, and telemedicine, plays a significant role in managing illnesses and promoting wellness. The corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine, ensuring convenient access to medical services while maintaining physical distance. Legislation has supported its integration into clinical practice and addressed compensation issues. However, ensuring clinical appropriateness and sustainability of telemedicine post-expansion has gained attention. We south to identify the most friendly and resistant specialties to telemedicine and to understand areas of interest within those specialties to grasp potential barriers to its use. Methods: We aimed to identify articles that incorporated telemedicine in any medical or surgical specialty and determine the adoption rate and intent of this new form of care. Additionally, a secondary search within these databases was conducted to analyze the advantages, disadvantages, and implementation of telemedicine in the healthcare system. Non-English articles and those without full text were excluded. The study selection and data collection process involved using search terms such as “medicine”, “surgery”, “specialties”, “telemedicine”, and “telemedicine”. Key Content and Findings: Telemedicine adoption varies among specialties. The pandemic led to increased usage, with telemedicine consultations comprising 30.1% of all visits, but specialties like mental health, gastroenterology, and endocrinology showed higher rates of adoption compared to optometry, physical therapy, and orthopedic surgery. Conclusions: The data shows that telemedicine uptake varies by specialty and condition due to the need for physical exams. In-person visits still dominate new patient visits despite increased telemedicine use. Telemedicine cannot fully replace in-person care but has increased visit volume and is secure. The adoption of telemedicine is higher in medical practices than in surgical practices, with neurosurgery and urology leading. Further research is needed to assess telemedicine’s suitability and effectiveness in different specialties and conditions.

Background: The use of bone morphogenic protein and mesenchymal stem cells has shown promise in promoting bone regeneration in calvarial defects. However, a systematic review of the available literature is needed to evaluate the efficacy of this approach. Methods: We comprehensively searched electronic databases using MeSH terms related to skull defects, bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, and bone morphogenic proteins. Eligible studies included animal studies that used BMP therapy and mesenchymal stem cells to promote bone regeneration in calvarial defects. Reviews, conference articles, book chapters, and non-English language studies were excluded. Two independent investigators conducted the search and data extraction. Results: Twenty-three studies published between 2010 and 2022 met our inclusion criteria after a full-text review of the forty-five records found in the search. Eight of the 23 studies used mice as models, while 15 used rats. The most common mesenchymal stem cell was bone marrow-derived, followed by adipose-derived. BMP-2 was the most popular. Stem cells were embedded in Scaffold (13), Transduction (7), and Transfection (3), and they were delivered BMP to cells. Each treatment used 2 × 10⁴–1 × 10⁷ mesenchymal stem cells, averaging 2.26 × 10⁶. Most BMP-transduced MSC studies used lentivirus. Conclusions: This systematic review examined BMP and MSC synergy in biomaterial scaffolds or alone. BMP therapy and mesenchymal stem cells in calvarial defects, alone, or with a scaffold regenerated bone. This method treats skull defects in clinical trials. The best scaffold material, therapeutic dosage, administration method, and long-term side effects need further study.

Background: Despite numerous measures used to prevent pressure ulcers, their growing prevalence in recent years is expected to continue as the population ages. This review aims to report the outcomes of the regenerative potential of MSCs in treating pressure ulcers, assessing the effectiveness of MSCs in treating pressure ulcers. Methods: A computerized search for articles on animal models that use MSCs as primary therapy to treat pressure ulcers, published from conception to present, was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL. Our search yielded 52 articles, narrowed to 44 after excluding duplicates. Results: Out of 52 articles collected from four databases, 11 met the inclusion criteria. A total of 11 articles published between 2008 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria. Eight studies were observational descriptive papers in animal models, and three were prospective. Six studies used autologous MSCs, while five used allogenic MSCs. Three studies were conducted in humans, and the remaining eight were conducted in animals. The most common method of cell delivery was an intradermal injection in the margins of the ulcer. All studies reported positive results, including improved wound healing, reduced inflammation, and improved tissue regeneration. Conclusions: MSCs have shown promising results in treating pressure ulcers in animal and clinical trials. The combination of MSCs and scaffold materials has also been studied and found to be effective in wound healing. A standardized human wound model has been proposed further to investigate the efficacy of cell-based therapies for chronic wounds. However, more research is needed to determine the best quantity of cells to apply for pressure ulcers and to ensure the safety and efficacy of these treatments in clinical settings.