BackgroundPhotographs are important tools to record, track, and communicate clinical findings. Mobile devices with high-resolution cameras are now ubiquitous, giving clinicians the opportunity to capture and share images from the bedside. However, secure and efficient ways to manage and share digital images are lacking.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to describe the implementation of a secure application for capturing and storing clinical images in the electronic health record (EHR), and to describe initial user experiences.MethodsWe developed CliniCam, a secure Apple iOS (iPhone, iPad) application that allows for user authentication, patient selection, image capture, image annotation, and storage of images as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file in the EHR. We leveraged our organization’s enterprise service-oriented architecture to transmit the image file from CliniCam to our enterprise clinical data repository. There is no permanent storage of protected health information on the mobile device. CliniCam also required connection to our organization’s secure WiFi network. Resident physicians from emergency medicine, internal medicine, and dermatology used CliniCam in clinical practice for one month. They were then asked to complete a survey on their experience. We analyzed the survey results using descriptive statistics.ResultsTwenty-eight physicians participated and 19/28 (68%) completed the survey. Of the respondents who used CliniCam, 89% found it useful or very useful for clinical practice and easy to use, and wanted to continue using the app. Respondents provided constructive feedback on location of the photos in the EHR, preferring to have photos embedded in (or linked to) clinical notes instead of storing them as separate PDFs within the EHR. Some users experienced difficulty with WiFi connectivity which was addressed by enhancing CliniCam to check for connectivity on launch.ConclusionsCliniCam was implemented successfully and found to be easy to use and useful for clinical practice. CliniCam is now available to all clinical users in our hospital, providing a secure and efficient way to capture clinical images and to insert them into the EHR. Future clinical image apps should more closely link clinical images and clinical documentation and consider enabling secure transmission over public WiFi or cellular networks.

BackgroundMobile health (mHealth) technologies provide many potential benefits to the delivery of health care. Medical decision support tools have shown particular promise in improving quality of care and provider workflow. Frontline health workers such as Community Health Workers (CHWs) have been shown to be effective in extending the reach of care, yet only a few medicine dosing tools are available to them.ObjectiveWe developed an mHealth medicine dosing tool tailored to the skill level of CHWs to assist in the delivery of care. The mHealth tool was created for CHWs with primary school education working in rural Mexico and Guatemala. Perceptions and impressions of this tool were collected and compared to an existing paper-based medicine dosing tool.MethodsSeventeen Partners In Health CHWs in rural Mexico and Guatemala completed a one-day training in the mHealth medicine dosing tool. Following the training, a prescription dosing test was administered, and CHWs were given the choice to use the mHealth or paper-based tool to answer 7 questions. Subsequently, demographic and qualitative data was collected using a questionnaire and an in-person interview conducted in Spanish, then translated into English. The qualitative questions captured data on 4 categories: comfort, acceptability, preference, and accuracy. Qualitative responses were analyzed for major themes and quantitative variables were analyzed using SAS.Results82% of the 17 CHWs chose the mHealth tool for at least 1 of 7 questions compared to 53% (9/17) who chose to use the paper-based tool. 93% (13/14) rated the phone as being easy or very easy to use, and 56% (5/9) who used the paper-based tool rated it as easy or very easy. Dosing accuracy was generally higher among questions answered using the mHealth tool relative to questions answered using the paper-based tool. Analysis of major qualitative themes indicated that the mHealth tool was perceived as being quick, easy to use, and as having complete information. The mHealth tool was seen as an acceptable dosing tool to use and as a way for CHWs to gain credibility within the community.ConclusionsA tailored cell phone-based mHealth medicine dosing tool was found to be useful and acceptable by CHWs in rural Mexico and Guatemala. The streamlined workflow of the mHealth tool and benefits such as the speed and self-lighting were found to be particularly useful features. Well designed and positioned tools such as this may improve effective task shifting by reinforcing the tasks that different cadres of workers are asked to perform. Further studies can explore how to best implement this mHealth tool in real-world settings, including how to incorporate the best elements of the paper-based tool that were also found to be helpful.

Background The clinical spectrum of septic arthritis in the era of the opioid crisis is ill-defined. Methods This is a retrospective chart review of 1465 cases of culture-positive native joint septic arthritis at Boston teaching hospitals between 1990 and 2018. Results Between 1990–2008 and 2009–2018, the proportion of septic arthritis cases involving people who inject drugs (PWID) rose from 10.3% to 20% (P < .0000005). Overall, methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) caused 41.5% of cases, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) caused 17.9%. Gram-negative rods caused only 6.2% of cases. Predictors of MRSA septic arthritis included injection drug use (P < .001), bacteremia (P < .001), health care exposure (P < .001), and advancing age (P = .01). Infections with MSSA were more common in PWID (56.3% vs 38.8%; P < .00001), as were infections with MRSA (24% vs 16.8%; P = .01) and Serratia sp. (4% vs 0.4%; P = .002). Septic arthritis in the setting of injection drug use was significantly more likely to involve the sacroiliac, acromioclavicular, and facet joints; 36.8% of patients had initial synovial fluid cell counts of <50 000 cells/mm3. Conclusions Injection drug use has become the most common risk factor for septic arthritis in our patient population. Septic arthritis in PWID is more often caused by MRSA, MSSA, and Serratia sp., and is more prone to involve the sacroiliac, acromioclavicular, sternoclavicular, and facet joints. Synovial fluid cell counts of <50 000 cells/mm3 are common in culture-positive septic arthritis.

Paging remains widely used for communications within hospitals about patient care. Although the majority of pages were judged to be clinically relevant and important, they frequently required a response potentially leading to interruptions in workflow, and communication waste. Paging rate and volume has not decreased in 25 years despite significant penetration of newer technologies. For the majority of current uses of pages, we believe other approaches may now be more appropriate. Regionalisation significantly reduces the number and urgency of the pages.

Problem The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic presented numerous challenges to inpatient care, including overtaxed inpatient medicine services, surges in patient censuses, disrupted patient care and educational activities for trainees, underused providers in certain specialties, and personal protective equipment shortages and new requirements for physical distancing. In March 2020, as the COVID-19 surge began, an interdisciplinary group of administrators, providers, and trainees at Brigham and Women’s Hospital created an inpatient virtual staffing model called the Virtual Team Rounding Program (VTRP). Approach The conceptual framework guiding VTRP development was rapid-cycle innovation. The VTRP was designed iteratively using feedback from residents, physician assistants, attendings, and administrators from March to June 2020. The VTRP trained and deployed a diverse set of providers across specialties as “virtual rounders” to support inpatient teams by joining and participating in rounds via videoconference and completing documentation tasks during and after rounds. The program was rapidly scaled up from March to June 2020. Outcomes In a survey of inpatient providers at the end of the pilot phase, 10/10 (100%) respondents reported they were getting either “a lot” or “a little” benefit from the VTRP and did not find the addition of the virtual rounder burdensome. During the scaling phase, the program grew to support 24 teams. In a survey at the end of the contraction phase, 117/187 (62.6%) inpatient providers who worked with a virtual rounder felt the rounder saved them time. VTRP leadership collaboratively and iteratively developed best practices for challenges encountered during implementation. Next Steps Virtual rounding provides a valuable extension of inpatient teams to manage COVID-19 surges. Future work will quantitatively and qualitatively assess the impact of the VTRP on inpatient provider satisfaction and well-being, virtual rounders’ experiences, and patient care outcomes.