Elyse Gonzales, Jonathan Shaw, Ian Nelligan, M. Winget, Doris Chen
{"title":"初级保健机构中腰痛和头痛视频就诊的临床效果","authors":"Elyse Gonzales, Jonathan Shaw, Ian Nelligan, M. Winget, Doris Chen","doi":"10.1370/afm.20.s1.3266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed the use of video visits in primary care. It is estimated that 73% of primary care visits can be effectively completed via video. However, there are no studies that demonstrate clinical effectiveness of video visits for specific chief complaints. Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of video visits compared to in-person visits for 2 common primary care chief complaints. Study design: Retrospective chart review. Dataset: Manual chart review of in-person visits from August-October 2019 and video visits from August-October 2020 from our institution’s outpatient urgent care clinic (Stanford Express Car e), restricted to 2 of the most common presenting chief complaints (CCs): low back pain and headache. Population studied: Patients who presented to a Stanford Express Care clinic with one of the aforementioned CCs. Outcome measures: Frequency of clinician recommendation for an urgent office or ED visit after the initial patient visit and frequency of follow-up visits within a 3-week period were used to assess clinical effectiveness of the visit. A visit is considered clinically effective when a clinician does not recommend an urgent office or ED visit after the initial patient visit and the patient does not have in-person follow-up visits within 3 weeks of the initial visit. Frequency of referrals placed and diagnostic imaging studies ordered during the initial patient visit were also measured. Results: Video visits for low back pain were less likely to be effectively assessed compared to in-person visits [74% (37/50) vs 82% (54/66), chi-square p=0.3]. During video visits for low back pain clinicians placed fewer referrals [24% (12/50) vs 36% (24/66), chi-square p=0.2] and ordered fewer diagnostic imaging studies [12% (6/50) vs 21% (14/66), chi-square p=0.2]. Video visits for headache were more likely to be effectively assessed compared to in-person visits [86% (43/50) vs 74% (37/50), chi-square p=0.1]. During video visits for headache, clinicians placed fewer referrals [14% (7/50) vs 22% (11/50), (chi-square p=0.3 ) and ordered fewer diagnostic imaging studies [2% (1/50) vs 18% (9/50), chi-square p=0.007]. Conclusions: For low back pain and headache, video visits were not significantly less likely than in-person visits to be effective. There was a statistically significant decrease in diagnostic imaging studies ordered during video visits for headaches.","PeriodicalId":199163,"journal":{"name":"Practice management and organization","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical effectiveness of video visits for low back pain and headache in a primary care setting\",\"authors\":\"Elyse Gonzales, Jonathan Shaw, Ian Nelligan, M. Winget, Doris Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1370/afm.20.s1.3266\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Context: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed the use of video visits in primary care. It is estimated that 73% of primary care visits can be effectively completed via video. However, there are no studies that demonstrate clinical effectiveness of video visits for specific chief complaints. Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of video visits compared to in-person visits for 2 common primary care chief complaints. Study design: Retrospective chart review. Dataset: Manual chart review of in-person visits from August-October 2019 and video visits from August-October 2020 from our institution’s outpatient urgent care clinic (Stanford Express Car e), restricted to 2 of the most common presenting chief complaints (CCs): low back pain and headache. Population studied: Patients who presented to a Stanford Express Care clinic with one of the aforementioned CCs. Outcome measures: Frequency of clinician recommendation for an urgent office or ED visit after the initial patient visit and frequency of follow-up visits within a 3-week period were used to assess clinical effectiveness of the visit. A visit is considered clinically effective when a clinician does not recommend an urgent office or ED visit after the initial patient visit and the patient does not have in-person follow-up visits within 3 weeks of the initial visit. Frequency of referrals placed and diagnostic imaging studies ordered during the initial patient visit were also measured. Results: Video visits for low back pain were less likely to be effectively assessed compared to in-person visits [74% (37/50) vs 82% (54/66), chi-square p=0.3]. During video visits for low back pain clinicians placed fewer referrals [24% (12/50) vs 36% (24/66), chi-square p=0.2] and ordered fewer diagnostic imaging studies [12% (6/50) vs 21% (14/66), chi-square p=0.2]. Video visits for headache were more likely to be effectively assessed compared to in-person visits [86% (43/50) vs 74% (37/50), chi-square p=0.1]. During video visits for headache, clinicians placed fewer referrals [14% (7/50) vs 22% (11/50), (chi-square p=0.3 ) and ordered fewer diagnostic imaging studies [2% (1/50) vs 18% (9/50), chi-square p=0.007]. Conclusions: For low back pain and headache, video visits were not significantly less likely than in-person visits to be effective. There was a statistically significant decrease in diagnostic imaging studies ordered during video visits for headaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":199163,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Practice management and organization\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Practice management and organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.20.s1.3266\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practice management and organization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.20.s1.3266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical effectiveness of video visits for low back pain and headache in a primary care setting
Context: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed the use of video visits in primary care. It is estimated that 73% of primary care visits can be effectively completed via video. However, there are no studies that demonstrate clinical effectiveness of video visits for specific chief complaints. Objective: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of video visits compared to in-person visits for 2 common primary care chief complaints. Study design: Retrospective chart review. Dataset: Manual chart review of in-person visits from August-October 2019 and video visits from August-October 2020 from our institution’s outpatient urgent care clinic (Stanford Express Car e), restricted to 2 of the most common presenting chief complaints (CCs): low back pain and headache. Population studied: Patients who presented to a Stanford Express Care clinic with one of the aforementioned CCs. Outcome measures: Frequency of clinician recommendation for an urgent office or ED visit after the initial patient visit and frequency of follow-up visits within a 3-week period were used to assess clinical effectiveness of the visit. A visit is considered clinically effective when a clinician does not recommend an urgent office or ED visit after the initial patient visit and the patient does not have in-person follow-up visits within 3 weeks of the initial visit. Frequency of referrals placed and diagnostic imaging studies ordered during the initial patient visit were also measured. Results: Video visits for low back pain were less likely to be effectively assessed compared to in-person visits [74% (37/50) vs 82% (54/66), chi-square p=0.3]. During video visits for low back pain clinicians placed fewer referrals [24% (12/50) vs 36% (24/66), chi-square p=0.2] and ordered fewer diagnostic imaging studies [12% (6/50) vs 21% (14/66), chi-square p=0.2]. Video visits for headache were more likely to be effectively assessed compared to in-person visits [86% (43/50) vs 74% (37/50), chi-square p=0.1]. During video visits for headache, clinicians placed fewer referrals [14% (7/50) vs 22% (11/50), (chi-square p=0.3 ) and ordered fewer diagnostic imaging studies [2% (1/50) vs 18% (9/50), chi-square p=0.007]. Conclusions: For low back pain and headache, video visits were not significantly less likely than in-person visits to be effective. There was a statistically significant decrease in diagnostic imaging studies ordered during video visits for headaches.