Introduction: Neurology wait times - from referral to consultation - continue to grow, leading to various adverse effects on patient outcomes. Key elements of virtual care can be leveraged to improve efficiency. This study examines the implementation of a novel virtual care model - Virtual Rapid Access Clinics - at the Neurology Centre of Toronto. The model employs a patient-centred care workflow, involving multidisciplinary staff and online administrative tools that are synthesized to expedite care and maintain quality.
Methods: Virtual Rapid Access Clinic efficacy was studied by determining average wait times and patient throughput, calculated from anonymous data that was extracted from the clinic patient database (n = 1542). Comparative analysis focused on new patient consultations during the 12-month periods prior to (pre-Virtual Rapid Access Clinic, n = 456) and following (post-Virtual Rapid Access Clinic, n = 1086) Virtual Rapid Access Clinic implementation.
Results: After Virtual Rapid Access Clinic implementation, there was a mean 15-day wait time reduction, and a monthly average 52-patient increase in patient throughput. Wait time reductions and increased patient throughput were observed in all three Virtual Rapid Access Clinic sub-clinics - epilepsy, headache and concussion. Respectively, average wait times reduced significantly by 26.4 and 18.9 days and insignificantly by 1.1 days; monthly average patient throughputs increased by 235%, 95% and 161%.
Discussion: These findings demonstrated that the Virtual Rapid Access Clinic model of care is effective at reducing patient wait times and increasing patient throughput. While the Virtual Rapid Access Clinic presents a feasible model both during and after pandemic restrictions, further research exploring its scalability in other care contexts, potential changes in care quality and efficiency outside of pandemic restrictions must be performed.
Introduction: Suboptimal access to dermatologic care is dependent on patient location and insurance type. Although there have been attempts to address access issues, barriers to providing excellent dermatologic care to all patients at the right time still exist. The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical impact of Dermatology Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) project participation on primary care providers' diagnostic and treatment tendencies and accuracy.
Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study constructed using Dermatology Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes case and recommendation data from November 2015 to June 2021. The University of Missouri-based Dermatology Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes specialty hub team offers regularly scheduled live interactive tele-mentoring sessions for primary care providers who practice in rural and underserved areas. 524 patient cases presented by 25 primary care providers were included in the analysis. Of those, 449 cases were included in diagnostic concordance, and 451 in treatment concordance analysis.
Results: Less than 40% of all diagnoses were fully concordant with an expert panel. Over 33% of patients were misdiagnosed, and over 26% received partially correct diagnosis. Only 16% of all treatment recommendations were fully concordant with an expert panel.
Discussion: Diagnostic and treatment accuracy of participants is low, and Dermatology Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes platform ensured patients received correct diagnosis and treatment quickly. Although tele-dermatology models are effective, they continue to be underutilized. Dermatologists in practice and training should be encouraged to adopt innovative clinical educational models, like Dermatology ECHO, to expand access to dermatologic expertise for the most marginalized populations.
Introduction: Rural communities often face chronic challenges of high rates of serious health conditions coupled with inadequate access to health care services-challenges exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. One strategy with the potential to mitigate these problems is the increased use of telehealth technology. A feature of telehealth applications-collaboration between health care providers for consultation and other purposes-referred to herein as Rural Provider-to-Provider Telehealth (RPPT), introduces important expertise that may not exist locally in rural communities. Literature indicates that RPPT is operationalized through many methods with an array of purposes. While RPPT is a promising strategy that brings additional expertise to patient-centered rural care delivery, there is limited evidence addressing important considerations, including how patient access and outcomes, provider satisfaction and performance, and payment may be affected by its use.
Methods: Recognizing the significant potential of RPPT and the need for more information associated with its use, the National Institutes of Health convened a Pathways to Prevention (P2P) workshop to further understand RPPT's effectiveness and impact on improving health outcomes in rural settings. The P2P initiative, supported by several federal health agencies, engaged rural health stakeholders and experts to examine four key questions, identify related knowledge gaps, and provide recommendations to advance understanding of the use and impact of RPPT.
Results: Included in this report is a description of the process used to generate information about RPPT, the identification of key knowledge gaps, and specific recommendations to further build needed evidence.
Discussion: The emerging use of RPPT is an important tool for bridging gaps in access to care that impacts rural populations. However, to fully understand the value and effects of RPPT, new research is needed to fill the knowledge gaps identified in this report. Additionally, this report should help engage providers, payors, and policymakers interested in supporting evidence-informed RPPT practice, policy, and payment, with the ultimate aim of improving access to health care and health status of rural communities in the United States and worldwide.
Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has reinforced the necessity and importance of telepractice. Although studies suggest frameworks to facilitate telepractice implementation, how parents learn related therapeutic skills via telepractice remains unexplored. The purpose of this study was to explore the perspectives and performance changes of parents with children enrolled in aural-oral rehabilitation who transition from in-person sessions to telepractice.
Methods: A total of 456 parents were enrolled in an aural-oral rehabilitation program with different online session formats [telepractice (n = 392), consultation (n = 23), and hybrid (n = 41)] during the pandemic. The Parental Teaching Skil Scale and the Parental Behavioral Skills Scale were used to examine parent performance changes before and during the lockdown. Furthermore, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 parents.
Results: Parents who scored higher in in-person courses were more likely to enrol in telepractice and make steady progress. Parents who participated in hybrid sessions tended to score lower on Parental Teaching Skill Scale before lockdown and reported that the dual-track, parallel learning method provided them with a set amount of time to discuss teaching difficulties with their therapists without being disturbed by their children. Parents who attended the consultation sessions scored higher on Parental Behavioral Skills Scale than on Parental Teaching Skill Scale during the in-person courses.
Discussion: Parents who continued online courses during the lockdown showed consistent and significant gains in most skills related to aural-oral rehabilitation, regardless of session format. Moreover, parents who scored better on Parental Behavioral Skills Scale than in Parental Teaching Skill Scale during in-person courses tended to request consultation sessions during the lockdown.
Introduction: Telemedicine is increasingly used to deliver healthcare in many clinical specialities. However, the adoption of telemedicine in the delivery of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) has been relatively slow and limited. This study aims to collate current evidence for telemedicine in OPAT regarding clinical efficacy, safety, acceptability and cost-effectiveness.
Methods: We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, EMCARE, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases through 24 July 2022, for relevant studies published in English. Research articles and conference abstracts were included if they involved any form of telephone or video consultation in delivering parenteral antibiotics in the home or outpatient setting. Study findings were synthesised into three main themes: patient outcomes and safety, patient and provider satisfaction and cost-effectiveness. The mixed methods appraisal tool was used to review the methodological quality of the studies. PROSPERO CRD42022342874.
Results: The literature search yielded 311 articles, of which 12 (five full-length articles and seven conference abstracts) reporting over 1245 telemedicine interventions were reviewed. The reported outcomes were heterogeneous. Telemedicine was cost-effective and associated with high patient satisfaction and comparable complication rates compared to conventional OPAT. Considering six comparative studies, rehospitalisation risk was lower for telemedicine than conventional OPAT (risk ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.88; I2 = 31%).
Discussion: The results of this review demonstrate that telemedicine has a role in delivering safe and cost-effective OPAT care, especially for patients residing in remote and geographically isolated locations. Nevertheless, high-quality studies and publication of existing data and experiences are needed to further validate this model of care delivery.
Introduction: The aim was to identify whether cardiovascular telerehabilitation programs (CV-T-REHAB) can improve functional capacity, cardiorespiratory fitness and quality of life (QoL) to the same extent of presential rehabilitation (CV-P-REHAB) in older adults, by meta-analysis of previous studies.
Methods: Literature search was conducted in October 2020 in four databases to select controlled trials of CV-T-REHAB effects on functional capacity (six-minute walk test [6MWT]), cardiorespiratory fitness (maximal oxygen consumption [O2max]), and QoL in older adults (> 50 years) and included new articles in April 2022.
Results: CV-T-REHAB improved 6MWT (11.14 m [CI95% = 8.03; 14.26], p < 0.001), O2max (1.18 ml/kg/min [CI95% = 0.70; 1.66], p < 0.001), and QoL (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.36 [CI95% = 0.05; 0.67], p = 0.02). CV-T-REHAB increased O2max to a greater extent than CV-P-REHAB (1.08 ml/kg/min [0.39; 1.76], p = 0.002). Although the 6MWT and O2max analyses proved consistent and homogeneous, the QoL analysis showed considerable inconsistency (I2 = 92.90%), suggesting the need for studies exploring the effect of CV-T-REHAB on QoL in this population. Part of the heterogeneity was explained by age differences, as CV-T-REHAB improved QoL in adults >65 years, but not in adults <64 years.
Conclusion: CV-T-REHAB improved cardiorespiratory fitness to a level equal to or higher than CV-P-REHAB and improved functional capacity and QoL; being mainly effective for QoL in older adults >65 years. Thus, CV-T-REHAB can be a good alternative, when not the best option and might be considered especially for individuals with limited access to participate in face-to-face programs.
Introduction: Uptake of telehealth has surged, yet no previous studies have evaluated the clinimetric properties of clinician-administered performance-based tests of function, strength, and balance via telehealth in people with chronic lower limb musculoskeletal pain. This study investigated the: (i) test-retest reliability of performance-based tests via telehealth, and (ii) agreement between scores obtained via telehealth and in-person.
Methods: Fifty-seven adults aged ≥45 years with chronic lower limb musculoskeletal pain underwent three testing sessions: one in-person and two via videoconferencing. Tests included 30-s chair stand, 5-m fast-paced walk, stair climb, timed up and go, step test, timed single-leg stance, and calf raises. Test-retest reliability and agreement were assessed via intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC; lower limit of 95% confidence interval (CI) ≥0.70 considered acceptable). ICCs were interpreted as poor (<0.5), moderate (0.5-0.75), good (0.75-0.9), or excellent (>0.9).
Results: Test-retest reliability was good-excellent with acceptable lower CI for stair climb test, timed up and go, right leg timed single-leg stance, and calf raises (ICC = 0.84-0.91, 95% CI lower limit = 0.71-0.79). Agreement between telehealth and in-person was good-excellent with acceptable lower CI for 30-s chair stand, left leg single-leg stance, and calf raises (ICC = 0.82-0.91, 95% CI lower limit = 0.71-0.85).
Discussion: Stair climb, timed up and go, right leg timed single-leg stance, and calf raise tests have acceptable reliability for use via telehealth in research and clinical practice. If re-testing via a different mode (telehealth/in-person), clinicians and researchers should consider using the 30-s chair stand test, left leg timed single-leg stance, and calf raise tests.
Introduction: Studies suggest that patients are satisfied with telehealth in ambulatory settings. However, tele-neurology satisfaction data are limited by a small sample size and COVID-19-era data is not specific to movement disorders clinics. In this prospective observational study, telehealth utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic was assessed, and patient satisfaction was compared between telehealth and in-person visits in an outpatient movement disorders center.
Methods: Patients ≥18 years who completed an appointment at Northwestern's Movement Disorders Clinic were invited to complete a post-visit Medallia survey. The primary outcomes of the survey were likelihood to recommend (LTR) provider, LTR location, and 'spent enough time,' on a 0-10 scale. Responses were categorized into in-person vs. telehealth groups.
Results: Telehealth utilization significantly increased from a pre-COVID timeframe rate of 0.3% (Nov 2019 to Feb 2020) to 39.5% during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020 through April 2021) (p-value < 0.001). During the COVID-19 pandemic, 621 patients responded to the post-visit Medallia survey (response rate = 30%), including 365 in-person and 256 telehealth visits. No significant differences were observed between in-person and telehealth encounters in LTR provider (p = 0.892), LTR location (p = 0.659), and time spent (p = 0.395). Additional subgroup multivariable analysis did not support differences in satisfaction between different age groups.
Discussion: With its large sample size, our study demonstrates that in the setting of increased TH utilization in movement disorders clinic during the COVID-19 pandemic, patients reported similar satisfaction with telehealth compared to in-person visits. This study supports the utility of telehealth to provide specialized neurologic clinic care.
Introduction: Telehealth may address healthcare disparities for rural populations. This systematic review assesses the use, effectiveness, and implementation of telehealth-supported provider-to-provider collaboration to improve rural healthcare.
Methods: We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, CINAHL®, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from 1 January 2010 to 12 October 2021 for trials and observational studies of rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Abstracts and full text were dual-reviewed. We assessed the risk of bias for individual studies and strength of evidence for studies with similar outcomes.
Results: Seven studies of rural uptake of provider-to-provider telehealth documented increases over time but variability across geographic regions. In 97 effectiveness studies, outcomes were similar with rural provider-to-provider telehealth versus without for inpatient consultations, neonatal care, outpatient depression and diabetes, and emergency care. Better or similar results were reported for changes in rural clinician behavior, knowledge, confidence, and self-efficacy. Evidence was insufficient for other clinical uses and outcomes. Sixty-seven (67) evaluation and qualitative studies identified barriers and facilitators to implementing rural provider-to-provider telehealth. Success was linked to well-functioning technology, sufficient resources, and adequate payment. Barriers included lack of understanding of rural context and resources. Methodologic weaknesses of studies included less rigorous study designs and small samples.
Discussion: Rural provider-to-provider telehealth produces similar or better results versus care without telehealth. Barriers to rural provider-to-provider telehealth implementation are common to practice change but include some specific to rural adaptation and adoption. Evidence gaps are partially due to studies that do not address differences in the groups compared or do not include sufficient sample sizes.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：