Sepsis risk assessment: A retrospective analysis after a cognitive risk management robot (Robot Laura®) implementation in a clinical-surgical unit

6Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed at evaluating the impact of the implementation of a cognitive robot (Robot Laura™) on processes related to the identification and care of patients with risk of sepsis in a clinical-surgical unit of a private hospital in Curitiba-PR. Methods: The study data were obtained from the retrospective review of medical records of patients identified with infection and/or sepsis, in the period of six months before and after the implementation of such technology in the hospital. In addition, the Average Attendance Time (AAT) was obtained from the autonomous reading of the robot. Results: The average time/median until antibiotic prescription from the first identified sign of infection, with or without sepsis, was 390/77 and 109/58 minutes, respectively, in the six months before and after implementation of the technology. However, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.85). Regarding AAT, it was possible to observe a reduction from 305 to 280 minutes when comparing the periods of six months before and after the implementation of the technology (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Technologies such as this may be promising in helping healthcare professionals to identify risky situations for patients, as well as in assisting them to optimize the care required. However, further studies, with a greater number of subjects and with different scenarios, are necessary to consistently validate the results found.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kalil, A. J., Dias, V. M. de C. H., Rocha, C. da C., Morales, H. M. P., Fressatto, J. L., & de Faria, R. A. (2018). Sepsis risk assessment: A retrospective analysis after a cognitive risk management robot (Robot Laura®) implementation in a clinical-surgical unit. Research on Biomedical Engineering, 34(4), 310–316. https://doi.org/10.1590/2446-4740.180021

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free