Health Care Industry Leaders Research Articles

Effective factors for the adoption of IoT applications in nursing care: A theoretical framework for smart healthcare

The utilization of the Internet of Things (IoT) presents a promising opportunity for the healthcare industry which is continuously expanding and persistently aspiring to enhance the quality of medical services and reduce its operational costs through the implementation of new technologies. Despite the proven benefits of utilizing IoT-based technologies, its integration in the healthcare sector is minimal, particularly in nursing care. The purpose of this study is to establish a conceptual model to guide program designers and implementation leaders in evaluating the adoption of IoT products and services in nursing care, from the perspective of nurses. The study employed an empirical quantitative research design utilizing a structured online questionnaire to collect data from a convenience sample of nursing staff gathered data were subjected to statistical analysis using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and Structural Equation Modeling Partial Least Square (SEM-PLS). Data analysis led to the establishment of a framework to identify factors influencing the integration of IoT and barriers that may impede its adoption in nursing care. The study makes a valuable contribution to academia by addressing a gap in the existing literature relating to the adoption of IoT in medical services, particularly in nursing care, and providing a novel theoretical framework that encompasses effective factors for the integration of IoT in medical care. This model provides deep insight and guidance to healthcare industry leaders, system developers, and nursing professionals to improve program design and implementation of IoT applications in healthcare. In addition, the model guides building engineering in the planning and design of medical facilities aligned with the IoT technologies and its physical environment. Finally, the study paved the way for further research exploring the implementation of IoT-based technologies and expanding the model to other stakeholders and functions within medical departments as well as other industries.

Parental Leave Policies in the Top 20 US Hospitals: A Call for Inclusivity and Improvement.

To evaluate and compare parental leave policies from the top United States (US) hospitals with a focus on inclusivity of all types of parents. In September and October of 2021, the parental leave policies of the top 20 US hospitals, ranked by the 2021 US News & World report, were evaluated. Parental leave policies were obtained and reviewed through the hospitals' public websites. Hospitals' Human Relations (HR) departments were contacted to confirm the policies. Hospital policies were scored against a rubric created by the authors. Among the top US hospitals (21 total hospitals), 17 (81%) had publicly available policies, and one policy was obtained by contacting HR. Fourteen of the 18 hospitals (77.8%) had a parental leave policy distinctive from short-term disability and offered paid paternity or partner leave. Thirteen hospitals (72.2%) offered parental leave for parents whose children were carried through surrogacy. Fourteen hospitals (77.8%) included adoptive parents; however, only five hospitals (27.8%) specifically included foster parents. The average paid leave for birthing mothers was 7.9 weeks compared to 6.6 weeks for nonbirthing parents. Only three hospitals offered the same leave for birthing and nonbirthing parents. While a few of the top 20 hospitals have paid parental leave policies that are inclusive and equivalent to all parents, many do not and represent an area for improvement. As healthcare industry leaders, these hospitals should strive for inclusive parental leave policies that care for their employees with the same high standards they set for caring for patients.

Healthcare Innovations to Address the Challenges of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

We have been faced with an unprecedented challenge in combating the COVID-19/SARS-CoV2 outbreak that is threatening the fabric of our civilization, causing catastrophic human losses and a tremendous economic burden globally. During this difficult time, there has been an urgent need for biomedical engineers, clinicians, and healthcare industry leaders to work together to develop novel diagnostics and treatments to fight the pandemic including the development of portable, rapidly deployable, and affordable diagnostic testing kits, personal protective equipment, mechanical ventilators, vaccines, and data analysis and modeling tools. In this position paper, we address the urgent need to bring these inventions into clinical practices. This paper highlights and summarizes the discussions and new technologies in COVID-19 healthcare, screening, tracing, and treatment-related presentations made at the IEEE EMBS Public Forum on COVID-19. The paper also provides recent studies, statistics and data and new perspectives on ongoing and future challenges pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Top Six: Standardized Safety Practices in U.S. Army Medical Department Treatment Facilities Worldwide

Summary Scholars and health care industry leaders have attempted to learn from high-reliability organizations (HROs) in other high-risk industries in the hopes of creating a safer environment for patients and staff. This article describes the implementation of and analyzes the outcomes of the U.S. Army Medical Department’s systemwide rollout of the Top Six HRO Communication Practices. The practices include: (1) Leader Daily Safety Briefings; (2) Safety Leadership Rounds; (3) Unit-Based Huddles; (4) Situation Background Assessment Recommendation Tool for Communicating Critical Information; (5) Institution of Briefs and Debriefs for Surgical Cases; and (6) Use of the Universal Protocol, a routinized mandatory final verification before every procedure. Over 18 months, through March 2021, each of the six components saw improvement.

A Narrative Review on the Role of Acids, Steroids, and Kinase Inhibitors in the Treatment of Keratosis Pilaris.

Keratosis pilaris is a common and benign genetic skin disorder that results in patches of rough bumps on the skin, with varying degrees of reddening and inflammation. These bumps in the skin are caused by the dead skin cells that plug the hair follicles. Keratosis pilaris often manifests in small, hard bumps on the legs and arms. A common treatment method for many acne conditions, including keratosis pilaris, is acid, which has shown promise in recent years. This review examines the use and success of multiple types of acids, steroids, and kinase inhibitors in clinical and non-clinical settings to treat and understand keratosis pilaris. In the treatment of keratosis pilaris, acid primarily works by breaking down the dead skin cells that clog the hair follicles. Some types of steroids have anti-inflammatory properties that have proven useful in minimizing the appearance of acne. Kinase inhibitors control important skin cell functions, such as cell signaling, metabolism, division, and survival, which undoubtedly affect the appearance of skin as a whole. The known impact of acid, steroids, and kinase inhibitors on keratosis pilaris is underestimated and should be given more attention by healthcare industry leaders.

Implementation of family psychosocial risk assessment in pediatric cancer with the Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT): study protocol for a cluster-randomized comparative effectiveness trial

BackgroundChildhood cancer affects and is affected by multiple levels of the social ecology, including social and relational determinants of health (e.g., economic stability, housing, childcare, healthcare access, child and family problems). The 2015 Standards of Psychosocial Care in Pediatric Cancer outline optimal psychosocial care sensitive to these ecological factors, starting with assessment of psychosocial healthcare needs to promote medical and psychosocial outcomes across all children with cancer. To address the first standard of family psychosocial assessment, the Psychosocial Assessment Tool (PAT) is a validated screener ready for broad implementation.MethodThe PAT will be implemented across a national sample of 18 pediatric cancer programs ranging in size (annual new patients) in a mixed methods, comparative effectiveness study, guided by the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation, comparing two implementation strategies. It is hypothesized that implementation will be more successful at the patient/family, provider, and institutional level when training (strategy I) is combined with implementation expanded resources (strategy II). There are three aims: (1) Refine the two implementation strategies using semi-structured qualitative interviews with 19 stakeholders including parent advocates, providers, pediatric oncology organization representatives, healthcare industry leaders; (2) Compare the two theoretically based and empirically informed strategies to implement the PAT in English and Spanish using a cluster-randomized controlled trial across 18 sites. Stratified by size, sites will be randomized to cohort (3) and strategy (2). Outcomes include adoption and penetration of screening (patient/family), staff job satisfaction/burnout (provider), and cost-effective use of resources consistent with family risk (institution); (3) Based on the results of the trial and feedback from the first and second aim, we will develop and disseminate a web-based PAT Implementation Toolkit.DiscussionUse of the PAT across children’s cancer programs nationally can achieve the assessment standard and inform equitable delivery of psychosocial care matched to family need for all patients.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04446728, registered 23 June 2020

Remedy and Reaction: The Peculiar American Struggle over Health Care Reform

Review of: Remedy and Reaction: The Peculiar American Struggle Over Health Care Reform, by Paul Starr. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013. 342 pp. $17.00 paper. ISBN: 978-­‐0-­‐300-­‐18915-­‐5 By: David N. Pellow. 2015. Contemporary Sociology 44(2): 256-­‐258 “Do we have an obligation to provide health care for our citizens?” Paul Starr opens this outstanding book with this question and follows up by asking another more vexing one: why is the U.S. health care system so stubbornly unique among capitalist democracies? It is a well-­‐known and embarrassing fact that the U.S. has the most expensive health care system in the world and yet has the highest number of uninsured citizens of any western democracy. But the solution to the problem has always eluded us. The answers to Starr’s questions vary widely across the political spectrum exposing deep divides between and within the major political parties and reveals how a combination of social forces prevents the U.S. from guaranteeing what people in many other democracies view as a fundamental right. Starr’s argument is that the U.S. missed a chance to set up a general system for financing health care in the first half of the 20 th century, and when the government finally sought to do so, the nation was caught in what he calls a policy trap, in which enough of the public and health care industry leaders were satisfied with the complicated and costly system that changing it became nearly impossible. He addresses the three factors usually indicted for producing the health care crisis in the U.S.: “special interests,” national values, and “the daunting complexity of the problems of health care and health policy.” And while Starr agrees that there is some truth within each of these explanations, he challenges the claim that any one of them alone is responsible for the quagmire that is our health care system. Of the three explanations, the argument that “special interests” have prevented major health care reform carries particular weight with many observers. After all, as Starr demonstrates throughout the book, the American Medical Association and other key stakeholders actively opposed anything resembling a national health care system virtually anytime the idea emerged in U.S. politics. But that explanation is too tidy because there have been moments when health care industry leaders have supported expanded coverage proposals that they viewed as better than less appealing alternatives such as single payer. The “special interest” explanation really falls short when we discover that the public itself is split over reform because unionized workers, veterans, disabled persons, and the elderly can access Medicare, while segments of low income populations can also qualify for Medicaid. These millions of Americans may not have the best health care, but they often see themselves as “reasonably well-­‐protected” and fear losing their coverage or benefits under any major reform, particularly since they feel they have earned their way into such programs while other groups are seen as less worthy. This, I believe, is the most disturbing and revealing aspect of the health care crisis in this country and— although Starr does not draw the link—has strong echoes of the kind of divisive

Irrationality in health care: what behavioral economics reveals about what we do and why

The health care industry in the U.S. is peculiar. We spend close to 18% of our GDP on health care, yet other countries get better results-and we don't know why. To date, we still lack widely accepted answers to simple questions, such as Would requiring everyone to buy health insurance make us better off? Drawing on behavioral economics as an alternative to the standard tools of health economics, author Douglas E. Hough seeks to more clearly diagnose the ills of health care today. A behavioral perspective makes sense of key contradictions-from the seemingly irrational choices that we sometimes make as patients, to the incongruous behavior of physicians, to the morass of the long-lived debate surrounding reform. With the new health care law in effect, it is more important than ever that consumers, health care industry leaders, and the policymakers who are governing change reckon with the power and sources of our behavior when it comes to health.

An Overview Of Consumer Perceptions And Acceptance As Well As Barriers And Potential Of Electronic Personal Health Records

Healthcare industry leaders, government agencies and the general public are beginning to see the value that Electronic Health Records (EHR) systems bring through increased quality, reduced medical error rates, and improved care coordination. One subset of the EHR, known as the electronic personal health record (PHR), is gaining in popularity. Before PHRs will be widely adopted, many barriers to their use must be overcome. These include the costs to the developer, host, and patient. Patient access to electronic resources is a concern. Interoperability is another problem. It is not practical for physicians to convert different data formats so that different PHRs may be adopted. Finally, privacy and security concerns also impact EHR adoption. Patients want assurance that their data is secure and not used for marketing purposes. Despite these barriers, there is high consumer interest in PHR products. In future, it is expected that PHR programs will be certified, security and privacy will be enforced by legislation, and standards for interoperability will be developed. PHR will also incorporate additional decision support aids and may become part of a social network that promotes peer support for positive behavior change. This paper will provide an overview of all these issues pertaining to PHR.

Maine’s nursing workforce legislation: Lessons from a rural state

As the aging baby boom generation begins to place additional pressures on the health care system and the nursing workforce of the same generation begins to retire, the worsening nursing shortage has the potential to seriously impact the delivery of health care in the United States and is receiving considerable attention nationwide. Although federal initiatives such as the Nurse Reinvestment Act are critical, issues of supply and demand for registered nurses must also be addressed at the state level. In Maine, nursing leadership has partnered with state policy makers and health care industry leaders in a multi-year initiative that has included the nursing community's envisioning its "preferred future," formal data collection on the nursing workforce, ongoing education of the Maine State Legislature about the nursing shortage, and legislative initiatives.

Bridging the digital divide: Reaching vulnerable populations

The AMIA 2003 Spring Congress entitled “Bridging the Digital Divide: Informatics and Vulnerable Populations” convened 178 experts including medical informaticians, health care professionals, government leaders, policy makers, researchers, health care industry leaders, consumer advocates, and others specializing in health care provision to underserved populations. The primary objective of this working congress was to develop a framework for a national agenda in information and communication technology to enhance the health and health care of underserved populations. Discussions during four tracks addressed issues and trends in information and communication technologies for underserved populations, strategies learned from successful programs, evaluation methodologies for measuring the impact of informatics, and dissemination of information for replication of successful programs. Each track addressed current status, ideal state, barriers, strategies, and recommendations. Recommendations of the breakout sessions were summarized under the overarching themes of Policy, Funding, Research, and Education and Training. The general recommendations emphasized four key themes: revision in payment and reimbursement policies, integration of health care standards, partnerships as the key to success, and broad dissemination of findings including specific feedback to target populations and other key stakeholders.

Out of sight, out of mind: why doesn't widespread clinical quality failure command our attention?

This paper examines the tolerance by all stakeholders of increasingly well documented evidence of serious and widespread clinical quality failure in the United States. Using research evidence from psychology, it describes specific cognitive and motivational impediments to the perception of quality failure-those shared by all stakeholders and those particularly relevant to patients and their families and to health care professionals. The authors endorse efforts by the National Quality Forum and others to make quality failure more publicly visible. They also point to the pivotal role of health care industry leaders in sustaining focus on a problem that inherently resists visibility.

US healthcare expenditures forecast into the new millennium

At the UC Irvine Graduate School of Management’s Seventh Annual Healthcare Forecast Conference [California, US; February 1998], top US government and healthcare industry leaders met to debate issues and solutions for providing care in an environment beset by diminishing public trust and intense political battles for control of emerging healthcare legislation. The conference, entitled‘Winners and Losers Under Managed Care’,provided a unique opportunity for top-level US government officials, business leaders and academics to share their perspectives and forecasts on key economic and political issues which impact healthcare in the US.

Why variation reduction is not everything: a new paradigm for service operations

Highlights that one service industry in the USA ‐ health care ‐ has accepted high inherent rates of variation into its process designs. Notes that, increasingly, health care industry leaders recognize that elimination of unnecessary variation is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for producing quality professional services at reasonable costs. Using the innovation model of Boynton et al. (1993), identifies continuous improvement, rather than mass production, as the key step in the rationalization of what has been a craft industry and the ultimate objective of delivering health care in a mass customization mode. Claims, however, that it is not sufficient, because high levels of inherent variation will continue to exist and must be managed, even in the best of all possible worlds. Reviews the health care experience (in the context of that model) to suggest how service operations managers and researchers should conceptualize variation, and then discusses what that conceptualization of variation implies about how operations management should treat variation in its modelling and decision making.

Managed care accreditation: the process and early findings.

Health maintenance organizations (HMO)s are taking center stage in our nation's move toward healthcare reform. Issues such as quality, cost, and access to healthcare are critical to consumers; the managed care industry provides care at a significantly more affordable cost than does traditional fee-for-service medicine. Although national surveys show that HMO members are extremely satisfied with the level of service and care they receive, managed care organizations still strive to demonstrate their commitment to quality. As healthcare industry leaders and major customer groups attempt to establish measurable performance standards, the emergence of the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA) has enhanced the ability of managed care organizations (MCOs) to demonstrate excellence by way of accreditation.