Accuracy Assessment of Outpatient Telemedicine Encounters at an Academic Ophthalmology Department.

Tadhg Schempf, Gagan Kalra, Patrick W Commiskey, Eve M Bowers, Amani Davis, Evan L Waxman, Roxana Fu, Andrew M Williams
{"title":"Accuracy Assessment of Outpatient Telemedicine Encounters at an Academic Ophthalmology Department.","authors":"Tadhg Schempf,&nbsp;Gagan Kalra,&nbsp;Patrick W Commiskey,&nbsp;Eve M Bowers,&nbsp;Amani Davis,&nbsp;Evan L Waxman,&nbsp;Roxana Fu,&nbsp;Andrew M Williams","doi":"10.1055/s-0042-1756200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose</b>  We assess the clinical accuracy of direct-to-patient real-time outpatient video visit encounters at our eye center. <b>Design</b>  This was a retrospective longitudinal study. <b>Subjects and Methods</b>  Patients who completed a video visit over a 3-week period between March and April 2020 were included. Accuracy assessment was determined by comparing diagnosis and management from the video visit with subsequent in-person follow-up over the next year. <b>Results</b>  A total of 210 patients (mean age 55±18 years) were included, of whom 172 (82%) were recommended a scheduled in-person follow-up encounter after their video visit. Among the 141 total patients who completed in-person follow-up, 137 (97%) had a diagnostic agreement between telemedicine and in-person evaluation. Management plan agreed for 116 (82%), with the remainder of visits either escalating or deescalating treatment upon in-person follow-up with little substantive change. Compared with established patients, new patients had higher diagnostic disagreement following video visits (12 vs. 1%, <i>p</i> =0.014). Acute visits trended toward more diagnostic disagreement compared with routine visits (6 vs. 1%, <i>p</i> =0.28) but had a similar rate of management change on follow-up (21 vs. 16%, <i>p</i> =0.48). New patients were more likely to have early unplanned follow-up than established patients (17 vs. 5%, <i>p</i> =0.029), and acute video visits were associated with unplanned early in-person assessments compared with routine video visits (13 vs. 3%, <i>p</i> =0.027). There were no serious adverse events associated with the use of our telemedicine program in the outpatient setting. <b>Conclusions</b>  Video visits had high diagnostic and management agreement with subsequent in-person follow-up encounters.</p>","PeriodicalId":73579,"journal":{"name":"Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017)","volume":"14 2","pages":"e193-e200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/80/ab/10-1055-s-0042-1756200.PMC9927968.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose  We assess the clinical accuracy of direct-to-patient real-time outpatient video visit encounters at our eye center. Design  This was a retrospective longitudinal study. Subjects and Methods  Patients who completed a video visit over a 3-week period between March and April 2020 were included. Accuracy assessment was determined by comparing diagnosis and management from the video visit with subsequent in-person follow-up over the next year. Results  A total of 210 patients (mean age 55±18 years) were included, of whom 172 (82%) were recommended a scheduled in-person follow-up encounter after their video visit. Among the 141 total patients who completed in-person follow-up, 137 (97%) had a diagnostic agreement between telemedicine and in-person evaluation. Management plan agreed for 116 (82%), with the remainder of visits either escalating or deescalating treatment upon in-person follow-up with little substantive change. Compared with established patients, new patients had higher diagnostic disagreement following video visits (12 vs. 1%, p =0.014). Acute visits trended toward more diagnostic disagreement compared with routine visits (6 vs. 1%, p =0.28) but had a similar rate of management change on follow-up (21 vs. 16%, p =0.48). New patients were more likely to have early unplanned follow-up than established patients (17 vs. 5%, p =0.029), and acute video visits were associated with unplanned early in-person assessments compared with routine video visits (13 vs. 3%, p =0.027). There were no serious adverse events associated with the use of our telemedicine program in the outpatient setting. Conclusions  Video visits had high diagnostic and management agreement with subsequent in-person follow-up encounters.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术眼科门诊远程医疗接触的准确性评估。
目的评估眼科中心直接对患者实时门诊视频就诊的临床准确性。设计本研究为回顾性纵向研究。受试者和方法包括在2020年3月至4月期间完成为期3周的视频访问的患者。准确性评估是通过比较视频访问的诊断和管理与随后的次年的亲自随访来确定的。结果共纳入210例患者(平均年龄55±18岁),其中172例(82%)建议在视频访视后安排一次面对面随访。在141例完成现场随访的患者中,137例(97%)在远程医疗和现场评估之间诊断一致。116例(82%)患者同意管理计划,其余患者在面对面随访时治疗升级或降级,几乎没有实质性变化。与已就诊的患者相比,新患者在视频就诊后的诊断歧异率更高(12% vs. 1%, p =0.014)。与常规就诊相比,急性就诊倾向于更多的诊断不一致(6比1%,p =0.28),但在随访中有相似的管理改变率(21比16%,p =0.48)。新患者比老患者更有可能进行早期计划外随访(17% vs. 5%, p =0.029),与常规视频访视相比,急性视频访视与计划外早期现场评估相关(13% vs. 3%, p =0.027)。在门诊环境中使用我们的远程医疗项目没有出现严重的不良事件。结论视像访视与随后的现场随访具有较高的诊断和管理一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Erratum: The Big Data Gap: Asymmetric Information in the Ophthalmology Residency Match Process and the Argument for Transparent Residency Data. Self-Reported Perceptions of Preparedness among Incoming Ophthalmology Residents. The Matthew Effect: Prevalence of Doctor and Physician Parents among Ophthalmology Applicants. Gender Representation on North American Ophthalmology Societies' Governance Boards. The Big Data Gap: Asymmetric Information in the Ophthalmology Residency Match Process and the Argument for Transparent Residency Data.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1