Telemedicine for Endovascular Neurosurgery Consultation During the COVID-19 Era: Patient Satisfaction Survey.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic necessitated the use of telemedicine for most medical specialties, including neurosurgery, although before the pandemic, neurosurgeons infrequently used telemedicine for outpatient visits. We conducted a patient-centric evaluation of telemedicine in our endovascular neurosurgery practice, covering a 4-month period early in the pandemic. METHODS: Survey e-mails after telemedicine visits were sent to all patients who underwent an outpatient telemedicine visit between March 11, 2020, and June 22, 2020, at an endovascular neurosurgery clinic affiliated with a tertiary care center. RESULTS: Of 140 patients, 65 (46%) completed the e-mail survey. Of the 65 respondents, 35 (54%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that even before their telemedicine experience, they thought telemedicine would be a convenient way to receive a neurological consultation. After their telemedicine visit, 47 (72%) agreed or strongly agreed with this statement, and 28 (43%) agreed or strongly agreed that they would prefer telemedicine for future visits. Of the 65 respondents, 61 (94%) rated their telemedicine visit as average or better: 34 (52%) rated it excellent, 12 (18%) rated it above average, and 15 (23%) rated it average. When patients compared their telemedicine visit with a prior in-person clinic visit, only 10 of 44 patients (23%) thought the telemedicine visit was more complicated than an in-person visit, and 21 of 44 (48%) said they would prefer telemedicine for future visits. CONCLUSIONS: Our patients expressed satisfaction with their telemedicine visits, and telemedicine will likely play an important role in future outpatient endovascular neurosurgery consultations.

Trends in academic productivity in the COVID-19 era: analysis of neurosurgical, stroke neurology, and neurointerventional literature.

BACKGROUND: Academic physicians aim to provide clinical and surgical care to their patients while actively contributing to a growing body of scientific literature. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in procedural-based specialties across the United States witnessing a sharp decline in their clinical volume and surgical cases. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of COVID-19 on neurosurgical, stroke neurology, and neurointerventional academic productivity. METHODS: The study compared the neurosurgical, stroke neurology, and neurointerventional academic output during the pandemic lockdown with the same time period in previous years. Editors from a sample of neurosurgical, stroke neurology, and neurointerventional journals provided the total number of original manuscript submissions, broken down by months, from the year 2016 to 2020. Manuscript submission was used as a surrogate metric for academic productivity. RESULTS: 8 journals were represented. The aggregated data from all eight journals as a whole showed that a combined average increase of 42.3% was observed on original submissions for 2020. As the average yearly percent increase using the 2016-2019 data for each journal exhibited a combined average increase of 11.2%, the rise in the yearly increase for 2020 in comparison was nearly fourfold. For the same journals in the same time period, the average percent of COVID-19 related publications from January to June of 2020 was 6.87%. CONCLUSION: There was a momentous increase in the number of original submissions for the year 2020, and its effects were uniformly experienced across all of our represented journals.