Agent based risk patient management

This paper explores the role of information and communication technologies in managing risk and early discharge patients, and suggests innovative actions in the area of E-Health services. Treatments of chronic illnesses, or treatments of special needs such as cardiovascular diseases, are conducted in long-stay hospitals, and in some cases, in the homes of patients with a follow-up from primary care centre. The evolution of this model is following a clear trend: trying to reduce the time and the number of visits by patients to health centres and derive tasks, so far as possible, toward outpatient care. Also the number of Early Discharge Patients (EDP) is growing, thus permiting a saving in the resources of the care center. The adequacy of agent and mobile technologies is assessed in light of the particular requirements of health care applications. A software system architecture is outlined and discussed. The major contributions are: first, the conceptualization of multiple mobile and desktop devices as part of a single distributed computing system where software agents are being executed and interact from their remote locations. Second, the use of distributed decision making in multiagent systems, as a means to integrate remote evidence and knowledge obtained from data that is being collected and/or processed by distributed devices. The system will be applied to patients with cardiovascular or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Diseases (COPD) as well as to ambulatory surgery patients. The proposed system will allow to transmit the patient's location and some information about his/her illness to the hospital or care centre

Outpatient follow-up during the first year after heart transplantation, is it feasible?

First year follow-up after heart transplantation requires invasive tests. Although patients used to be hospitalized for this purpose, ambulatory invasive procedures now offer the possibility of outpatient follow-up. The feasibility and security of this strategy is unknown. From 2007 we transitioned to outpatient follow-up. We have retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of the outpatient group (2007 to 2014) and an inpatient group (2000–2006). Basal characteristics, hospital stay, infections, rejection episodes and vascular complications were evaluated. 87 patients had Inpatient Follow-up (IF) and 98 Outpatient Follow-up (OF). Basal characteristics were similar, with significant differences in immunosuppression (tacrolimus IF 44.8% vs. OF 90.8%, and mycophenolate IF 86.2% vs OF 100%, both p values < 0.001) and age (IF 52 ± 11.5 years vs. OF 56.1 ± 11 years, p = 0.016). In the OF group more clinical visits were performed (IF 10 vs. OF 13, p < 0.001) while hospital stay was lower (IF 23 days vs. OF 3 days, p < 0.001). The rate of infection, rejection, and vascular complications was similar. No difference was found in 1-year mortality (IF 2.3% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.60). First year post-cardiac transplantation outpatient follow-up seems to be feasible and safe in terms of infection, rejection, vascular complications and mortality.

Outpatient follow-up during the first year after heart transplantation, is it feasible?

First year follow-up after heart transplantation requires invasive tests. Although patients used to be hospitalized for this purpose, ambulatory invasive procedures now offer the possibility of outpatient follow-up. The feasibility and security of this strategy is unknown. From 2007 we transitioned to outpatient follow-up. We have retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of the outpatient group (2007 to 2014) and an inpatient group (2000–2006). Basal characteristics, hospital stay, infections, rejection episodes and vascular complications were evaluated. 87 patients had Inpatient Follow-up (IF) and 98 Outpatient Follow-up (OF). Basal characteristics were similar, with significant differences in immunosuppression (tacrolimus IF 44.8% vs. OF 90.8%, and mycophenolate IF 86.2% vs OF 100%, both p values < 0.001) and age (IF 52 ± 11.5 years vs. OF 56.1 ± 11 years, p = 0.016). In the OF group more clinical visits were performed (IF 10 vs. OF 13, p < 0.001) while hospital stay was lower (IF 23 days vs. OF 3 days, p < 0.001). The rate of infection, rejection, and vascular complications was similar. No difference was found in 1-year mortality (IF 2.3% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.60). First year post-cardiac transplantation outpatient follow-up seems to be feasible and safe in terms of infection, rejection, vascular complications and mortality.