Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare最新文献

BackgroundPost-stroke cognitive impairment is characterized by cognitive dysfunction occurring within 6 months post-stroke. Telemedicine uses communication technologies to deliver healthcare remotely and has shown efficacy in improving cognitive impairment. However, a systematic review specifically evaluating telemedicine's effects on cognitive outcomes in post-stroke cognitive impairment is lacking.ObjectivesThis systematic review aimed to examine the effectiveness of telemedicine interventions for cognitive function in post-stroke cognitive impairment.MethodsA comprehensive search was performed across 10 electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochran library, Scopus, and ProQuest Dissertations and three Chinese-language databases (CNKI, Wan Fang, and Vip) from their respective inception dates to May 2025. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Meta-analysis was performed by the use of Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 15.ResultsThe initial search yielded 10,365 articles, with 19 studies included in the systematic review. The results showed that telemedicine interventions had a significant moderate effect on global cognition (standardized mean difference (SMD = 0.69, Z = 4.23, P < 0.01) and significantly improved visuospatial function (SMD = 0.57, Z = 2.76, P < 0.05) and language (SMD = 0.62, Z = 2.59, P < 0.05). Sub-group analyses showed significant effects for both online tools or computer software and mobile apps, though high heterogeneity was noted. Additionally, telemedicine interventions had a significant effect on activities of daily living (SMD = 0.64, Z = 5.16, P < 0.01).ConclusionConsidering the obstacles and limitations of traditional face-to-face rehabilitation, telemedicine is an effective approach for treating post-stroke cognitive impairment that can significantly improve cognitive function. Future studies should address heterogeneity through rigorous designs, long-term follow-ups, neuroimaging, and biomarker integration to elucidate underlying mechanisms.The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024502185).

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical outcomes of a remote mental health program for managing anxiety and depression, primarily using asynchronous digital communication.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study examined U.S. adults seeking remote care for anxiety and depression from January 2021 to May 2022. The program involves clinician-led assessment, patient education, medication management, and ongoing monitoring, primarily via text. Anxiety and depression were measured using Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) scores. Outcomes examined were changes in scores, 50% score improvement rate, and remission rate (score <5) at 1, 3, and 6 months.ResultsDuring the period evaluated, 11,844 program participants met the inclusion criteria. Most were female (n = 8328, 70.3%); their age ranged from 18-82 years (median 31 years). At baseline, median PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores were 13 (IQR 9-17); 67% and 69% met score criteria for depression and anxiety, respectively. Most participants (80%) were prescribed a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI). By one month, average PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores decreased significantly by 9.2 and 9.1 points (both p < .01). At 1-month follow-up, the 50% score improvement rate was 66% for PHQ-9 and 69% GAD-7 (p < .01). Scores continued to decrease with follow-up. At 3 months, over half achieved remission (percent [95% CI]: 52% [51-54] for anxiety, 53% [52-55] for depression). Similar improvement was observed at 6 months and in sensitivity analyses accounting for loss to follow-up.ConclusionsUse of a remote mental health program with digital tools was associated with significant clinical improvement in anxiety and depression. Challenges remain in maintaining patient engagement and ensuring appropriate care quality monitoring in digital mental health programs. Additional research comparing remote digital care to traditional in-person models is warranted. Studies should examine long-term outcomes, optimal care protocols, and the challenges to integrating these programs into existing healthcare systems and ensuring equitable access.

IntroductionRural primary care clinics can expand their medication treatment for opioid use disorder (MOUD) capacity by coordinating care with external telemedicine (TM) vendors specializing in addiction medicine. This study used mixed methods to identify factors that influence patient referrals from rural primary care clinics to TM vendors for MOUD.MethodsBetween July/August 2020 and January/February 2021, 582 patients with OUD were identified across six primary care sites; that included 68 referred to an external TM vendor to receive MOUD. Mixed effects logistic regression identified individual and site-level factors associated with being referred to the TM vendor. Clinic providers and staff participated in in-depth interviews and focus groups to discuss their considerations for referring patients to the TM vendor.ResultsPatient referrals were positively associated with local household broadband coverage (OR = 2.55, p < 0.001) and negatively associated with local population density (OR = 0.01, p  =  0.003) and the number of buprenorphine prescribers in the county (OR = 0.85, p < 0.001). Clinic personnel expressed appreciation for psychiatric expertise and the flexibility to access MOUD brought by the TM vendor. Perceived concerns about TM referral included a lack of trust with external providers, uncertainty about TM service quality, workflow delays, and patients' technological and insurance challenges.ConclusionThis study revealed several clinic-level factors that may potentially influence patient referral to TM vendor services for MOUD. To facilitate the referral process and utilization of TM vendors, efforts should be made to foster open communication and trust between clinic providers and TM vendors, streamline workflows, and improve Internet access for patients.

IntroductionEmerging literature suggests that wearable devices offer a promising option for self-directed home-based upper limb training for persons with stroke. However, little research is available to explore integrating smartphone applications with wearable devices to provide upper limb telerehabilitation to stroke survivors at home. This study examined the feasibility and potential therapeutic effects of a wearable device integrated with a smartphone-based telerehabilitation system to provide upper limb rehabilitation to stroke survivors at home.MethodsTwelve stroke survivors from community support groups participated in a treatment consisting of 4-week telerehabilitation using a wearable device and 4-week conventional therapy successively in a single-blind, randomised crossover study. A 3-week washout period was administered between the two 4-week treatments. The primary outcome measures were the Fugl Meyer Assessment, the Action Research Arm Test, and the active range of motion (ROM) of the upper limb. Secondary outcome measures included the Motor Activity Log and exercise adherence.ResultsResults showed that the active ROM of participants' hemiplegic shoulder improved more significantly after 4 weeks of telerehabilitation with the wearable device than with conventional therapy. No significant differences were found in other outcome measures.ConclusionsA 4-week telerehabilitation programme using a wearable device improves the hemiplegic upper limb in community-dwelling stroke survivors and may be feasible as an effective intervention for self-directed upper limb rehabilitation at home.

BackgroundAlthough telemedicine with video support for preoperative evaluation has been found effective, there is limited research on anaesthesia consultation by phone without video support, particularly among high-risk patients. To evaluate the effectiveness, safety and potential benefits of performing pre-anaesthesia evaluation by phone before eye surgery in patients having non-invasive surgery, we performed an observational study in a French teaching hospital.MethodAll elective patients having elective ophthalmic surgery were included to have a consultation by phone instead of an in-person consultation, regardless of the type of anaesthesia or ASA score. The incidence of day-of-surgery cancellations, patient satisfaction and time/distance saved through phone consultations were assessed.ResultsFrom February to October 2022, data of 3480 patients were analyzed, including 370 (11%) high-risk patients (ASA 3-4). Anaesthesia-related day-of-surgery cancellation rate was 0.5% (n = 20) due to non-compliance with pre-operative instructions. No cancellation was due to inadequate pre-operative evaluation. No difference in cancellation rate was observed between low-risk patients and high-risk patients. Telephone consultations saved patients a mean of 126 min and 86 km. A younger age, an active status and living far from the hospital were associated with phone consultation preference.ConclusionPhone anaesthesia consultation seems to be effective and safe before ophthalmic surgery, regardless of patient's perioperative risk. In addition, phone consultation provides significant time and distance savings. Our results must be confirmed through a multicentric randomised study comparing phone and traditional consultation in ophthalmology as well as in other non-invasive surgical procedures in a high-risk patients population.

AimThe purpose of this study is to explore the effectiveness of a hospital-based asynchronous ear, nose, and throat (ENT) telehealth service (the Ear Portal) in reducing cost and improving access for children with otitis media.MethodsParticipants were recruited to the Ear Portal from a tertiary hospital ENT waiting list. Ear and hearing assessments were conducted during appointments by the Ear Portal research assistant, and data was stored for an asynchronous review by the Ear Portal multidisciplinary team. A cost-minimisation analysis was conducted for the Ear Portal and the standard care pathways. Waiting times to provide care for both pathways were calculated for children with semi-urgent (i.e. Category 2) and non-urgent (i.e. Category 3) referrals.ResultsThe running cost for the Ear Portal was $67.70 for initial appointments and $37.34 for follow-up appointments. Conversely, the running cost for the standard care pathway was $154.65 for initial appointments and $86.10 for follow-up appointments. A total of 223 appointments were required to offset the initial Ear Portal investment of $19,384.00. The median waiting time for the Ear Portal from initial contact to care plan delivery was <30 days, whereas the median waiting times for children in the standard care pathway were 291 days (interquartile range (IQR) = 117) for Category 2 and 371 days (IQR = 311) for Category 3 referrals.ConclusionUnder the current circumstances, the Ear Portal service can reduce costs for the health care system by reducing marginal costs per patient in addition to providing ENT specialist care within the clinically recommended timeframes.

IntroductionAccess to gender-affirming care (GAC) is limited for gender-diverse (GD) youth, with the potential for further limitations given the current political climate. GAC has been shown to improve the mental health of GD youth and telemedicine (TM) could increase access to GAC. With limited data on the acceptability and feasibility of TM for GAC among GD youth, we sought to further explore their perspectives on the use of TM in their care.MethodsWe used a semi-structured interview guide, with prompts developed to explore participants' knowledge of TM, identify factors that influenced use, and advantages or disadvantages of use.ResultsThirty GD participants aged 13-21 years old participated in TM. While TM was not the preferred option for medical visits, it was recognized as a practical option for providing GAC. Various actual and perceived disadvantages noted by youth included, technical issues interrupting the visit, not receiving care equivalent to that of an in-person visit, having to see themselves on the screen, family members interrupting visits, and meeting new staff while connecting to a TM visit. The advantages, however, were an increased autonomy and convenience of TM, especially when used for specific aspects of GAC.DiscussionThe use of TM in GAC could be optimized by limiting camera use, eliminating/reducing staff involvement, being sensitive to privacy issues, and alternating TM with in-person visits. Clinicians should be cognizant of patient preferences and concerns and be flexible with visit types.

BackgroundCOVID-19 disrupted healthcare routines and prompted rapid telemedicine implementation. We investigated the drivers of visit modality selection (telemedicine versus in-person) in primary care clinics at an academic medical centre.MethodsWe used electronic medical record data from March 2020 to May 2022 from 13 primary care clinics (N = 21,031 new, N = 207,292 return visits), with 55% overall telemedicine use. Hierarchical logistic regression and cross-validation methods were used to estimate the variation in visit modality explained by the patient, clinician and visit factors as measured by the mean-test area under the curve (AUC).ResultsThere was significant variation in telemedicine use across clinicians (ranging from 0-100%) for the same visit diagnosis. The strongest predictors of telemedicine were the clinician seen for new visits (mean AUC of 0.79) and the primary visit diagnosis for return visits (0.77). Models based on all patient characteristics combined accounted for relatively little variation in modality selection, 0.54 for new and 0.58 for return visits, respectively. Amongst patient characteristics, males, patients over 65 years, Asians and patient's with non-English language preferences used less telemedicine; however, those using interpreter services used significantly more telemedicine.ConclusionClinician seen and primary visit diagnoses were the best predictors of visit modality. The distinction between new and return visits and the minimal impact of patient characteristics on visit modality highlights the complexity of clinical care and warrants research approaches that go beyond linear models to uncover the emergent causal effects of specific technology features mediated by tasks, people and organisations.

IntroductionThe goal of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy of behavioral health care treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and anxiety delivered via telehealth.MethodsWe searched a combination of keywords related to telehealth, relevant mental health disorders, and evidence-based psychotherapies in three databases (PubMed, PsycInfo, and Embase) from database inception to April 2022. We included randomized controlled trials published in English wherein at least one arm received an evidence-based psychotherapy via telehealth. To be included, studies also had to enroll an adult population with symptoms or diagnosis of PTSD, depressive disorder, or anxiety disorder.ResultsModerate quality of evidence was consistent with only small differences, if any, in efficacy between video teleconferencing (VTC) and in-person delivery for patients with PTSD (d = 0.06, 95% CI -0.17, 0.28). However, for those with depression, in-person delivery was associated with better outcomes compared to VTC (d = 0.28, 95% CI 0.03, 0.54; low quality of evidence). We also found that evidence-based treatments delivered over telephone were more efficacious for depression compared to treatment as usual (d = -0.47, 95% CI -0.66, -0.28; very low quality of evidence). Very low quality of evidence supported the use of telehealth versus waitlist for anxiety (d = -0.48, 95% CI -0.89, -0.09).ConclusionsA synthesis across 29 studies indicates that the efficacy of telehealth for delivery of evidence-based behavioral health interventions varies by target diagnosis and telehealth modality. More research is needed on the efficacy of telehealth treatments for depression and anxiety.

IntroductionDuring the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Gustave Roussy Cancer Center introduced teleconsultation via telephone, as an alternative to face-to-face consultation to reduce patient hospital visits. This study was designed to assess patient and doctor satisfaction with this modality of care in oncology patient care during the period of the pandemic and beyond.MethodsWe designed two questionnaires based on validated scores to assess satisfaction from teleconsultation in patients (EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire [TSQ] scores) and doctors (Telehealth Usability Questionnaire [TUQ]), and anxiety levels in both groups (anxiety section of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS], HADS-A). These were electronically sent to patients and doctors with experience of at least one remote consultation during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.Results239 patients and 32 doctors were eligible for the analyses. In the patient group, the mean satisfaction scores were 79.5 (SD 18.1) and 74.92 (SD 15.3) for EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ, respectively. In the doctor group, the mean satisfaction scores were 67.1 (SD 12.7) and 64.9 (SD 13.9) for TUQ and TUQ for Skype for Business, respectively. 65.7% of patients and 81.2% of doctors had no/low anxiety. Univariable analyses in patients showed correlation of the EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ scores with anxiety and gender, with lower mean scores in women compared to men. Multivariable analysis showed correlation of the EORTC OUT-PATSAT 35 and TSQ scores to anxiety in both patients and doctors.ConclusionsTeleconsultation via telephone is an acceptable modality of care for oncology patients, with high satisfaction from its implementation during the pandemic reported by patients and doctors. This was consistent across responder groups with different characteristics. An individualized approach to patients should be implemented for the safe and effective use of teleconsultation in oncology beyond the pandemic.