Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare最新文献

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the precision of a web-based tool in measuring visual acuity (VA) in ophthalmic patients, comparing it to the traditional in-clinic evaluation using a Snellen chart, considered the gold standard.

Methods: We conducted a prospective and in-clinic validation comparing the Eyecare Visual Acuity Test® to the standard Snellen chart, with patients undergoing both tests sequentially. Patients wore their standard spectacles as needed for both tests. Inclusion criteria involved individuals above 18 years with VA equal to or better than +1 logMar (20/200) in each eye. VA measurements were converted from Snellen to logMAR, and statistical analyses included Bland-Altman and descriptive statistics.

Results: The study, encompassing 322 patients and 644 eyes, compared Eyecare Visual Acuity Test® to conventional methods, revealing a statistically insignificant mean difference (0.01 logMAR, P = 0.1517). Bland-Altman analysis showed a narrow 95% limit of agreement (0.22 to -0.23 logMAR), indicating concordance, supported by a significant Pearson correlation (r = 0.61, P < 0.001) between the two assessments.

Conclusion: The Eyecare Visual Acuity Test® demonstrates accuracy and reliability, with the potential to facilitate home monitoring, triage, and remote consultation. In future research, it is important to validate the Eyecare Visual Acuity Test® accuracy across varied age cohorts, including pediatric and geriatric populations, as well as among individuals presenting with specific comorbidities like cataract, uveitis, keratoconus, age-related macular disease, and amblyopia.

Background: Telemedicine has gained traction in surgical subspecialties, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to identify whether telemedicine can be appropriately integrated within surgical oncology practice.

Methods: This retrospective study evaluated patients who received either telemedicine or office follow-up after undergoing surgical oncology operations between 2016 and 2021. The telemedicine group (TG) and office group (OG) received a 15-question survey regarding their satisfaction with their care. Patient outcomes and responses were analyzed utilizing propensity-score matching in 1:1 fashion.

Results: Telemedicine group and OG each had 21 patients. Length of stay, complication frequency, follow-up frequency, and readmissions frequency within 90-days were comparable between groups. Telemedicine group expressed comparable satisfaction with postoperative care relative to OG (95.2% vs. 85.7%, p = 0.61). All telemedicine patients said they would utilize telemedicine again in the future and would recommend its use to others.

Conclusion: Patient satisfaction with postoperative telemedicine follow-up is comparable to those with in-person follow-up.

Heart failure is associated with high rates of hospitalization, which are more prevalent in frail patients, impacting the quality of life and clinical outcomes. Telemedicine is considered cost-effective for improving patient self-management and hospitalization. However, socioeconomic deprivation and frailty could hinder access to virtual care. We investigated if frailty and socioeconomic factors were associated with telemedicine access among heart failure patients. For this cross-sectional analysis of Continuum study, 35 patients were allocated to the "able to use" group (had a smart device and were able to use it) or the "not able to use" group. Socioeconomic deprivation was determined according to the deprivation index. Frailty was assessed using the Fried criteria. The mean age was 69.9 ± 9 years, 74% were in New York Heart Association class II. A total of 14 patients (39%) were physically frail. Patients considered not able to use the app were more socioeconomically deprived (p = 0.011) and frail (p = 0.036). There was no correlation between frailty score and socioeconomic deprivation (r = 0.15, p = 0.411). Telemedicine use seems to be independently associated with frailty and socioeconomic deprivation in heart failure patients. More efforts should be made to foster the inclusion of vulnerable patients and improve global telemedicine access.

Introduction: Adoption of telemedicine by healthcare facilities has dramatically increased since the start of coronavirus pandemic; yet, major differences exist in universal acceptance of telemedicine across different population groups. The goal of this study was to examine population-based factors associated with current and/or future use of telemedicine in Alabama.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was administered to 532 participants online or by phone, in four urban and eight rural counties in Alabama. Data were collected on: demographics, health insurance coverage, medical history, access to technology, and its use in accessing healthcare services. Generalized logit regression models were used to estimate the odds of choosing "virtual visit" and "phone communication" compared to "in-person visit" for the preferred choice of visit with the healthcare provider; as well as odds for willingness to participate in "virtual visit" in the future.

Results: Our study sample had a mean age of 43 (±15) years, 72.9% women, 45.9% Black or African American; 59.4% population living in an urban county. The odds of "phone communication" were higher compared to the odds of "in-person visit", with a unit increase in age (odds ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.00-1.03), after adjusting for other covariates. Among participants with past experience of virtual communications, the odds for choosing "virtual visit" were significantly higher compared to choice of in-person visit (odds ratio for virtual visit: 3.23, 95% confidence interval: 2.01-5.18), adjusted for other covariates. Further, people with college or more education were 71% less likely to choose "No" compared to those with high school or lower general education development education for future virtual visit [odds ratio for college or more: 0.29, 95% confodence interval: 0.10-0.87). Likewise, participants residing in rural counties were 57% less likely to choose "No" compared to urban counties for future virtual visit (odds ratio for rural participants: 0.43, 95% confidence interval:0.19-0.97).

Discussion: Our study found notable differences in age, education, and rurality for use and/or preference for telemedicine. Medical institutions and healthcare providers will need to account for these differences to ensure that the implementation of telemedicine does not exacerbate existing health disparities.

Introduction: We examined the suitability of using a video visit platform to perform postoperative parotidectomy evaluation at a tertiary care, multiple-surgeon otolaryngology center.

Methods: A retrospective case review was conducted of patients who underwent parotidectomy and postoperative video visits between November 2019 and December 2020. Success of video visit, plan if applicable, and post-visit outcomes were reviewed. Video visits were designated as successful if the physician could assess for complications in the postoperative course (e.g. first bite pain, Frey syndrome, ear numbness, unplanned visits to the emergency department, unplanned return to the operating room), perform examination of facial nerve function, and formulate care recommendations per clinical judgement without deferment of recommendations for a subsequent in-person visit.

Results: There were 96 postoperative video visits with 91 unique parotidectomy patients. Demographics: 28/63 male/female; average age, 54y. All video visits were suitable for successful postoperative parotidectomy patient evaluation. Eight visits (8.3%) consisted of patients presenting with common postoperative complications (e.g. eye dryness, first bite pain) and warranted care recommendations. In only two cases did the patient require further in-person procedural (hematoma evacuation, seroma aspiration) follow-ups. For the other 91.7% of visits (n = 88), no additional recommendations were required as patients experienced uncomplicated postoperative courses. Of all the patients, 26.1% (n = 23) were instructed to follow-up for routine surveillance. All other patients, 73.9% (n = 65) were instructed to follow-up as needed.

Conclusion: Postoperative parotidectomy evaluation is highly amenable to being performed by video. A telemedicine option offers convenience for patients in the majority of cases without compromising clinical assessment and judgment for the physician.

Background: Although teledermatology has been proven internationally to be an effective and safe addition to the care of patients in primary care, there are few pilot projects implementing teledermatology in routine outpatient care in Germany. The aim of this cluster randomized controlled trial was to evaluate whether referrals to dermatologists are reduced by implementing a store-and-forward teleconsultation system in general practitioner practices.

Methods: Eight counties were cluster randomized to the intervention and control conditions. During the 1-year intervention period between July 2018 and June 2019, 46 general practitioner practices in the 4 intervention counties implemented a store-and-forward teledermatology system with Patient Data Management System interoperability. It allowed practice teams to initiate teleconsultations for patients with dermatologic complaints. In the four control counties, treatment as usual was performed. As primary outcome, number of referrals was calculated from routine health care data. Poisson regression was used to compare referral rates between the intervention practices and 342 control practices.

Results: The primary analysis revealed no significant difference in referral rates (relative risk  = 1.02; 95% confidence interval = 0.911-1.141; p = .74). Secondary analyses accounting for sociodemographic and practice characteristics but omitting county pairing resulted in significant differences of referral rates between intervention practices and control practices. Matched county pair, general practitioner age, patient age, and patient sex distribution in the practices were significantly related to referral rates.

Conclusions: While a store-and-forward teleconsultation system was successfully implemented in the German primary health care setting, the intervention's effect was superimposed by regional factors. Such regional factors should be considered in future teledermatology research.

Introduction: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an effective, yet under-utilised, form of secondary prevention in cardiac patients. Telemedicine is one method of overcoming barriers to accessing CR. Previous systematic reviews highlight variation in the effectiveness of telerehabilitation programmes and current literature lacks identification of which telemedicine interventions are most effective, despite differences in the results of primary studies. The objectives of this literature review were to: evaluate the effectiveness of cardiac telerehabilitation compared to centre-based programmes for managing cardiac risk factors, satisfaction and adherence in cardiac patients; identify the technologies used to deliver CR; identify the key components of effective interventions.

Methods: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving an intervention group that received telerehabilitation and a control group that attended a CR centre were included.

Results: Twelve RCTs met the inclusion criteria. There is evidence to suggest that telerehabilitation programmes have similar effectiveness to centre-based CR. Phones were the most commonly used technology. Most studies used a combination of technologies including personal computers and self-monitoring equipment. Phase III telerehabilitation programmes using self-monitoring, motivational feedback and education were more effective than centre-based CR for increasing physical activity and functional capacity.

Conclusion: Cardiac telerehabilitation is delivered by a range of technologies and has a similar effectiveness to centre-based programmes. While evidence suggests that additional health benefits are seen in patients who receive a telemedicine intervention in Phase III of CR, further evidence would be required to confidently draw this conclusion.

Introduction: Telehealth is an applicable, acceptable, cost-effective, easily accessible, and speedy method for pregnant women. This study aimed to examine the impact of telehealth applications on pregnancy outcomes and costs in high-risk pregnancies.

Methods: Studies were selected from PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, EBSCO, Scopus, and Clinical Key databases according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria from January to February 2021. Cochrane risk-of-bias tools were used in the quality assessment of the studies.

Results: Four observational and eight randomized controlled studies were included in this meta-analysis (telehealth: 135,875, control: 94,275). It was seen that the number of ultrasound (p < 0.01) and face-to-face visits (p < 0.01), fasting insulin (p < 0.01), hemoglobin A1C before delivery (p < 0.01), and emergency cesarean section rates (p = 0.05) were lower in the telehealth group. In the telehealth group, the women's use of antenatal corticosteroids (p = 0.03) and hypoglycemic medication at delivery (p = 0.03), the total of nursing interventions (p < 0.01), compliance with actual blood glucose measurements (p < 0.01), induction intervention at delivery (p = 0.003), and maternal mortality (p < 0.001) rates were higher. Two groups were similar in terms of the use of medical therapy, total gestational weight gain, health problems related to pregnancy, mode and complications of delivery, maternal intensive care unit admission, fetal-neonatal growth and development, neonatal health problems and mortality, follow-up, and care costs.

Discussion: Telehealth and routine care yielded similar maternal/neonatal health and cost outcomes. It can be said that telehealth is a safe technique to work with in the management of high-risk pregnancies.

Introduction: We examined the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic impact on weekly trends in the billing of virtual and in-person physician visits in Ontario, Canada.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, physician billing records from Ontario were aggregated on a weekly basis for in-person and virtual visits from 3 January 2016 to 27 March 2021. For each type of visit, a segmented negative binomial regression analysis was performed to estimate the weekly pre-pandemic trend in billing volume per thousand adults (3 January 2016 to 14 March 2020), the immediate change in mean volume at the start of the pandemic, and additional change in weekly volume in the pandemic era (15 March 2020 to 27 March 2021).

Results: Before the start of the pandemic, the weekly volume of virtual visits per thousand adults was low with a 0.5% increase per week (rate ratio [RR]: 1.0053, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.0050-1.0056). A dramatic 65% reduction in in-person visits (RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.32-0.39) occurred at the start of the pandemic while virtual visits grew by 21-fold (RR: 21.3, 95% CI: 19.6-23.0). In the pandemic era, in-person visits rose by 1.4% per week (RR: 1.014, 95% CI: 1.011-1.017) but no change was observed for virtual visits (p-value = 0.31). Overall, we noted a 57.6% increase in total weekly physician visits volume after the start of the pandemic.

Discussion: These results are meaningful for virtual care reimbursement models. Future study needs to assess the quality of care and whether the increase in virtual care volume is cost-effective to society.