Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare最新文献

Introduction: Osteoporotic hip fracture is a major health problem. Falls, the primary cause, might lead to a persistent fear of falling (FoF) among older adults, affecting their daily activities and rehabilitation. While in-person interventions exist, limited research is available on the effects of tele-rehabilitation on the FoF after a hip fracture. Thus, this study aims to test the association of the @ctivehip tele-rehabilitation programme on reducing the levels of FoF experienced by both older adults with hip fracture and their family caregivers.

Methods: A non-randomised controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT02968589) that compared a webpage-based tele-rehabilitation (@ctivehip) against usual care. Fear of falling was assessed using the Short Falls Efficacy Scale-International. Patients' functional status was evaluated using the Functional Independence Measure. Physical performance was assessed by the Timed Up and Go test and Short Physical Performance Battery. We conducted a per-protocol analysis as the primary outcome, and an intention-to-treat approach as secondary analysis.

Results: A total of 71 patients with hip fracture (78.75 ± 6.12 years, 75% women) and their family caregivers participated. Participants in the intervention showed a higher decrease in FoF in comparison to those in the usual care (0.5 Cohen's d; p = 0.042). The reduction in FoF resulting from participation in the tele-rehabilitation programme was mediated by improvements in functional status by 79%. The @ctivehip programme did not decrease FoF of family caregivers.

Discussion: @ctivehip is associated with a reduction of the FoF in older adults with hip fractures, but not in their family caregivers, with the reduction being mostly explained by improvements in the patients' functional status. Although the intervention seems promising, it should not be applied in clinical settings until confirmed by appropriate-designed randomised clinical trials.

Objective: We compared the impact of accessing healthcare (1) by telehealth (via telephone or video) vs face-to-face; and (2) by telephone vs video telehealth care, on escalation to emergency care.

Methods: We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL to 24 July 2023; and conducted a citation analysis on 19 September 2023. We included randomised controlled trials. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Tool 2. We calculated risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean difference for continuous outcomes.

Results: Ten trials compared telehealth (five telephone, four video, one both) to face-to-face care. Six were overall low, three some concerns and one high risk of bias. There were no differences between telehealth and face-to-face for visits to the emergency department (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.29), hospitalisations up to 12 months (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.41), deaths or other adverse events. Costs of care were similar, as were patient satisfaction scores.Six trials compared telephone to video telehealth: three were overall low, two some concerns, and one high risk of bias. There were no differences between telephone and video for visits to the emergency department (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.12), hospitalisations (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.48), deaths, other adverse events, costs, or patient satisfaction. Healthcare provider satisfaction was high.

Conclusions: Telehealth care - delivered by telephone or by video - may be an appropriate alternative to face-to-face provision of care, as it does not increase the likelihood of escalation of care to the emergency department for patients in primary care, hospital outpatients, post-discharge patients or residents in aged care.

Background: Managing critically ill neonates has unique challenges, and the transport team plays an important role in stabilizing and facilitating the transfer of these neonates from lower-level nurseries to tertiary centers, and the use of telemedicine in transport (tele-transport) can potentially benefit patient care. We conducted a multicenter study to assess the readiness for utilizing telemedicine as an adjunct to guide the care of critically ill neonates among physicians and transport team members (TTMs). This is the first multicenter study that explored physicians' and TTMs' perceptions of telemedicine usage and its value in neonatal transport.

Methods: A confidential, voluntary survey on pre-implementation attitudes toward telemedicine usage during neonatal transport was conducted as part of a quality improvement initiative. This survey involved physicians and TTMs from four academic institutions whose responses were entered into an online survey using REDCap®. The survey inquired about satisfaction with the current practice of phone consultation and the perception of using telemedicine to optimize the management of neonates during transport.

Results: The overall response rate for the survey was 60.1%; 82 of 127 (64.6%) physicians and 64 of 116 (55.2%) TTMs responded to the surveys. Half of the physicians and less than one-fourth of the TTMs had prior experience with telemedicine other than that used on neonatal transport. TTMs expressed greater concern about the inconvenience of video (55% vs. physicians 35% agree or strongly agree) and its time consumption (84% vs. physicians 50%). More than 70% of physicians and less than half of TTMs endorsed the potential for added value and quality improvement with video capability. Almost half of TTMs reported concern about video calls reducing their autonomy in patient care. Physicians expressed confidence in management decisions they would make after video calls (72% confident or very confident) and less confidence (49%) about both the phone assessment by TTMs and their decisions based on phone assessment. In contrast, TTMs were confident or very confident (94%) in both sharing their assessment over the phone and executing patient management after a phone call, compared with 70% for decisions made after video calls.

Conclusions: Physicians and TTMs had distinct opinions on the use of telemedicine during neonatal transport. Physicians were more likely than TTMs to agree with statements about the potential for improving quality of care, while TTMs were more likely than physicians to say video calls would be time-consuming and inconvenient. We speculate some differences may stem from the TTMs' concern about losing their autonomy. Therefore, during implementation, it is critical for physicians and TTMs to agree on a shared mental model of indications for telemedicine during transport a

Aims: In-depth and updated systematic reviews evaluating telephone calls in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) management are missing. This study aimed to assess the effect of this intervention on glycemic control in T2DM patients when compared with usual care.

Methods: We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) on T2DM using Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and LILACS, up to March 2021. The Risk of Bias 2.0 (Rob 2.0) tool and GRADE were used for the quality evaluation. The intervention effect was estimated by the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). PROSPERO registry CRD42020204519.

Results: 3545 references were reviewed and 32 were included (8598 patients). Telephone calls, all approaching education, improved HbA1c by 0.33% [95% CI, -0.48% to -0.18%; I² = 78%; p < 0.0001] compared to usual care. A greater improvement was found when the intervention included pharmacologic modification (-0.82%, 95% CI, -1.42% to -0.22%; I² = 92%) and when it was applied by nurses (-0.53%, 95% CI, -0.86% to -0.2%; I² = 87%). Meta-regression showed no relationship between DM duration and HbA1c changes.

Conclusion: The telephone call intervention provided a benefit regarding T2DM glycemic control, especially if provided by nurses, or if associated with patient education and pharmacological treatment modification.

Introduction: As a result of the coronavirus pandemic, outpatient consultations in National Health Service Lanarkshire were conducted using various forms of teleconsultation. A qualitative study was undertaken to ascertain how senior medical students valued the experience of outpatient teleconsultations in comparison to face-to-face consultations during the pandemic.

Methods: Anonymised, voluntary surveys were emailed to all medical students who attended clinical placements in specialties utilising teleconsultations. Participants were asked to compare their experience of and perceived value of virtual consultants to face-to-face consultations. Thematic and statistical analysis was performed on the collected data.

Results: Participants unanimously agreed face-to-face consultations enabled learning, with 71.4% (n = 7) having similar experiences in video consultations if a senior was physically present beside them. Video consultation, when the senior clinician was also present virtually, was deemed useful to a lesser extent (66.7%, n = 6). Only half (57.1%, n = 14) valued the learning from telephone consultations. Qualitative analysis revealed that although face to face was the preferred consultation style, there was useful learning gained in all modalities. Students appreciated discussion with senior clinicians to facilitate learning and valued involvement in the consultation through history taking, especially in teleconsultations.

Discussion: Teleconsultation was an effective learning tool for medical students during the coronavirus pandemic, which preserved student exposure to patients during lockdown. This study is optimistic that widespread incorporation of teleconsultation, in all modality, has the ability to support students' clinical exposure and learning, which is becoming increasingly limited as medical student numbers continue to rise and with the ongoing effects of the pandemic.

Introduction: The aim of this research was to investigate the effects of telerehabilitation-based remote supervised or unsupervised structured exercise therapy on pain, disability, and quality of life related to chronic nonspecific neck pain.

Method: The study was designed as a single-blinded randomized controlled trial. Sixty-six eligible chronic nonspecific neck pain patients were randomized across three groups: remote supervised group (RSG, n = 22), unsupervised group (UG, n = 22), and waitlist control group (CG, n = 22). Progressive structured exercise therapy program was delivered weekly to patients in remote supervised group and unsupervised group to perform four days a week for four weeks. Remote supervised group was supervised by videoconference and text message. Pain, disability, and quality of life of participants were assessed at baseline, week 2, and post-therapy.

Results: Post-therapy pain and disability total change scores were -3.64 (95% CI -4.85 to -2.42) and -7.27 (95% CI -11.05 to -3.50) for remote supervised group compared with a change of -2.44 (95% CI -3.46 to -1.43) and -5.77 (95% CI -8.54 to -3.01) for unsupervised group, respectively. Post-therapy, quality of life improvements were greater for remote supervised group than unsupervised group overall (general health; remote supervised group: 19.01 (95% CI 6.86 to 31.16), unsupervised group: 12.50 (95% CI 4.79 to 20.21), and physical health; remote supervised group: 18.35 (95% CI 10.35 to 26.35), unsupervised group: 7.31 (95% CI 0.01 to 14.60)). Significant improvements in psychological health and environment-telerehabilitation for remote supervised group were not seen for unsupervised group and outcomes differences did not reach significance for control group (p > 0.05) post-therapy, except environment-telerehabilitation.

Discussion: Structured exercise therapy can improve chronic nonspecific neck pain outcomes when remotely supervised or unsupervised. Structured exercise therapy content and frequent communication are important for remote chronic nonspecific neck pain management.

Introduction: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) represents a major cause of death and disability worldwide. Brain damage is associated with physical and psychological difficulties among TBI survivors. Diverse face-to-face and telehealth programs exist to help survivors cope with these burdens. However, the effectiveness of telehealth interventions among TBI survivors remains inconclusive.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials were conducted. Relevant full-text articles were retrieved from seven databases, from database inception to January 2022, including Academic Search Complete, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science. Bias was assessed with the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to calculate the pooled effect size of telehealth interventions for TBI survivors. STATA 16.0 was used for statistical analysis.

Results: In total, 17 studies (N = 3158) applying telehealth interventions among TBI survivors were included in the analysis. Telehealth interventions decreased neurobehavioural symptom (standardized mean difference: -0.13; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.36 to 0.10), reduce depression (standardized mean difference: -0.32; 95% CI: -0.79 to 0.14), and increase symptom management self-efficacy (standardized mean difference: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.02-0.42).

Discussion: Telehealth interventions are promising avenues for healthcare delivery due to advances in technology and information. Telehealth programs may represent windows of opportunity, combining traditional treatment with rehabilitation to increase symptom management self-efficacy among TBI patients during recovery. Future telehealth programs can focus on developing the contents of telehealth modules based on evidence from this study.

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 accelerated the use of virtual visits within health care. We examined the utility of telemedicine for conducting visits in a tertiary head and neck practice.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on patients presenting via video to a tertiary-level head and neck clinic between January 2020 and December 2020. Patient demographics were collected in addition to visit indication, diagnostic imaging/tests at the time of visit, and post-visit plan. Visits were deemed successful if evaluation by video was sufficient in determining a clinical plan and did not require deferment of recommendations for subsequent in-person consult visits and/or work-up (labs, imaging). Logistic regression was performed to identify variables that served as significant predictors of successful video visits.

Results: A total of 124 video visits were reviewed. Video visits were successful for the initial evaluation 88.7% of the time (n = 110). Computerized tomographic scans were the most available diagnostic test, available for 54% of patients (n = 67), followed by biopsy report 30.6% (n = 38). Visit indication had a statistically significant effect on whether a treatment plan could be made (p = 0.024). For new patients with parotid masses (n = 42), definitive treatment plans could be made 97.6% of the time (n = 41). Patients presenting with an indication of thyroid mass (odds ratio: 0.19 (confidence interval: 0.00072-0.50), p = 0.018) and other neck mass (odds ratio: 0.035 (confidence interval: 0.0014, 0.90), p = 0.043) were at significantly lesser odds than parotid patients to have a successful video visit.

Discussion: In this study, virtual visits were successful for a high percentage of head and neck visits, particularly among patients seeking evaluation for parotid-related concerns.

Introduction: Virtual care using videoconference links between urban-based physical therapists and nurse practitioners in rural primary care may overcome access challenges and enhance care for rural and remote residents with chronic low back disorders (CBD). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the concordance of this new model of care with two traditional models.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study design, each of 27 participants with CBD were assessed by: 1) a team of a nurse practitioner (NP) located with a patient, joined by a physical therapist (PT) using videoconferencing (NP/PT_team); 2) in-person PT (PT_alone); and 3) in-person NP (NP_alone). Diagnostic and management concordance between the three groups were assessed with percent agreement and kappa.

Results: Overall diagnostic categorization was compared for PT_alone versus NP_alone and NP/PT_team: percent agreement was 77.8% (k = 0.474, p = 0.001) and 74.1% (k = 0.359, p = 0.004), respectively. In terms of management recommendations, the PT_alone and NP_alone demonstrated strong agreement on "need for urgent surgical referral" (92.6%, k = 0.649 (p < 0.00) and slight agreement for "refer to primary physician for pharmacology, lab or imaging" (81.5%, k = 0.372 (p = 0.013). The PT_alone and NP/PT_team demonstrated strong agreement on "need for urgent surgical referral" (96.3%, k = 0.649, p = 0.000) and "recommendation for PT follow up" (88.9%, k = 0.664, p = 0.000).

Discussion: The diagnostic categorization and management recommendations of the team using videoconferencing for CBD were similar to decisions made by an in-person PT. This model of care may provide a method for enhancing access to PT for CBD assessment and initial management in underserved areas.