The emergence of telehealth in orthotic services across the United Kingdom.

COVID-19 has impacted the National Health Service provision, creating urgency for departments to adapt and adopt new ways of delivering healthcare. The purpose of this service evaluation was to determine the emergence of telehealth in orthotic services across the UK in response to COVID-19. A survey exploring telehealth use was distributed online to orthotists approximately 6 months after the first peak of COVID-19 in the UK. It gathered information on telehealth prevalence, allocated appointment length and waiting times, clinician access to technology and clinicians' opinions on the efficacy of telehealth. The survey received 77 responses with over 90% of respondents reporting using telehealth. Most reported that they expected telehealth to remain part of the service, post COVID-19. Thematic analysis produced two main themes: the impact of COVID-19 and challenges still to overcome. Findings suggest that the pandemic has resulted in a backlog of patients waiting for an orthotic appointment, with services currently understaffed and lacking resources. For telehealth to be effective orthotists must have access to appropriate technology and training on how to use telehealth platforms, be provided with appropriate guidance on which patients are appropriate for telehealth consultations and given appropriate appointment times to enable safe and effective care.

A scoping review of foot and ankle telemedicine guidelines.

Background and Aims: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine in general. Its use has been widely adopted in the healthcare sector, but relatively little research has been conducted on the use of telemedicine for podiatry. This review aimed to explore and compare existing guidelines on telemedicine related to foot and ankle pathologies within a primary care setting. Methods: The preferred reporting guidelines for the extension of scoping reviews were used in this review, and a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed and implemented. This study made use of both databases and gray literature searches. Between 2012 and 2022, these databases were searched using various subject headings and free-text terms for the keywords "telemedicine" "foot health" and "guidelines" with appropriate Boolean operators. Results: The search yielded 356 articles, which were reduced to 283 after removing duplicates. Six more records were discovered through a Google and Google Scholar search and one through an article reference search. Six articles and three institutional practice guidelines were selected for synthesis after screening. The findings were classified according to the level of evidence and research quality, the function of telemedicine and the communication used, the research outcomes sought, and the type of recommendations and guidelines made available. Conclusion: This review highlights the lack of podiatric telemedicine guidelines for foot and ankle pathologies. Although foot and ankle guidelines for orthopedic and musculoskeletal virtual consultations have been mentioned, they do not cover the full range of potential case scenarios that fall within the remit of podiatric consultations in a primary care setting. This review suggests the development of foot and ankle telemedicine guidelines with recommendations on how they can better provide accessible care to their patients, making foot and ankle care management not only a hand-on-one but also reachable virtually, where applicable.

A scoping review of foot and ankle telemedicine guidelines

Background and Aims The COVID‐19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine in general. Its use has been widely adopted in the healthcare sector, but relatively little research has been conducted on the use of telemedicine for podiatry. This review aimed to explore and compare existing guidelines on telemedicine related to foot and ankle pathologies within a primary care setting. Methods The preferred reporting guidelines for the extension of scoping reviews were used in this review, and a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed and implemented. This study made use of both databases and gray literature searches. Between 2012 and 2022, these databases were searched using various subject headings and free‐text terms for the keywords "telemedicine” "foot health” and "guidelines” with appropriate Boolean operators. Results The search yielded 356 articles, which were reduced to 283 after removing duplicates. Six more records were discovered through a Google and Google Scholar search and one through an article reference search. Six articles and three institutional practice guidelines were selected for synthesis after screening. The findings were classified according to the level of evidence and research quality, the function of telemedicine and the communication used, the research outcomes sought, and the type of recommendations and guidelines made available. Conclusion This review highlights the lack of podiatric telemedicine guidelines for foot and ankle pathologies. Although foot and ankle guidelines for orthopedic and musculoskeletal virtual consultations have been mentioned, they do not cover the full range of potential case scenarios that fall within the remit of podiatric consultations in a primary care setting. This review suggests the development of foot and ankle telemedicine guidelines with recommendations on how they can better provide accessible care to their patients, making foot and ankle care management not only a hand‐on‐one but also reachable virtually, where applicable.

Do UK Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) have sufficient guidelines and training to provide telehealth patient consultations?

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a rapid shift to remote consultations. United Kingdom (UK) NHS Allied Health Professional (AHP) services may have been unprepared for telehealth implementation. This study explored these services' organisational readiness regarding telehealth guidelines implementation and staff training. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey exploring available telehealth guidelines and staff training was distributed among UK AHPs and AHP service managers between May and June 2021. RESULTS: 658 participants answered the survey (119 managers and 539 clinicians). Most services, in which telehealth was in place, had implemented telehealth guidelines (clinicians, 64%; managers, 82%), with most guidelines produced by the NHS staff who use them for their consultations. Most clinicians reported that guidelines had ambiguous areas (e.g., regarding protection from litigation and dealing with emergencies), whereas most managers reported the opposite opinion. Guidelines most frequently reported on appropriate telehealth technology and environment for staff and patients, while recommended consultation length and how to conduct telehealth with certain population groups were least reported. Clinicians lacked training in most telehealth aspects, while managers reported that staff training focused on telehealth software and hardware. For both clinicians and managers, training is needed on how to deal with emergencies during telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: UK NHS AHP services are not fully equipped with clear and comprehensive guidelines and the skills to deliver telehealth. Vulnerable people are excluded from current guidelines, which may widen health inequalities and hinder the success of the NHS digital transformation. The absence of national guidelines highlights the need for uniform AHP telehealth guidelines.

Provision of rehabilitation and assistive technology services in a low resource setting during the COVID-19 pandemic and introduction of telehealth: service users' and providers' perspectives.

The COVID-19 pandemic created a challenge for providing assistive technology (AT) and rehabilitation services, with many service providers implementing telehealth service provision for the first time. The objective of this study was to explore the experiences of people accessing and providing AT and rehabilitation services during the pandemic and to assess the implementation of telehealth service delivery at an assistive technology and rehabilitation center in India. A mixed-methods design, combining analysis of clinical data and semi-structured interviews, was utilized. A descriptive analysis of demographics and clinical characteristics of service users accessing services through telehealth, or in-person mode was completed. In addition, service users were interviewed to explore their experiences of accessing services during the pandemic. Service providers were also interviewed to gather their opinions on telehealth service delivery during the pandemic. Findings showed that telehealth was an alternative tool in the pandemic for continuing to deliver services in a low-resource setting. However, not all types of services could be successfully delivered via telehealth. There are barriers to the delivery of telehealth services that need to be considered and addressed to allow successful implementation, and it is important to consider that telehealth consultations are not suitable for all service users.

The potential impact of allied health professional telehealth consultations on health inequities and the burden of treatment.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid shift to remote consultations. The study aimed to explore the prevalence of telehealth consultations amongst allied health professional (AHP) services in the UK National Health Service (NHS), and the potential impact on health inequities and burden of treatment for patients. METHODS: Cross-sectional online survey. Participants were practising UK registered AHP and/or AHP service manager in an NHS/social care/local authority service. Data was collected between May - June 2021. RESULTS: 658 participants took part in this study, including 119 AHP service managers, managing a total of 168 AHP services, and 539 clinicians. 87.4% of clinicians and 89.4% of services represented were using telehealth consultations as a method of delivering healthcare, the majority reported their services were planning to continue using telehealth post COVID-19 restrictions. Participants reported a lack of technological skills for patients as the most prevalent barrier affecting the patient's ability to conduct a telehealth consultation, followed by a lack of technology for patients. These were also reported as the biggest disadvantages of telehealth for patients. The majority of clinicians reported a reduction in the cost of parking/transport to attend hospital appointments as a patient benefit of telehealth consultations. Reported benefits for clinicians included saving travel time/costs and allowing flexible working, while benefits to the AHP service included patient flexibility in how their appointments are conducted and reducing the potential exposure of staff to communicable diseases. CONCLUSIONS: The current large-scale implementation of telehealth in NHS AHP services may increase disparities in health care access for vulnerable populations with limited digital literacy or access. Consequently, there is a danger that telehealth will be considered inappropriate and thus, underutilised, negating the potential benefits of sustainability, patient empowerment and the reduction in the burden of treatment.

Exploration of implementation, financial and technical considerations within allied health professional (AHP) telehealth consultation guidance: a scoping review including UK AHP professional bodies' guidance.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a shift to remote consultations, but telehealth consultation guidelines are lacking or inconsistent. Therefore, a scoping review was performed to chart the information in the articles exploring telehealth for the UK allied health professionals (AHPs) and compare them with the UK AHP professional bodies' guidelines. DESIGN: Scoping review following Aksey and O' Malley methodological framework. DATA SOURCES: CINHAL and MEDLINE were searched from inception to March 2021 using terms related to 'telehealth', 'guidelines' and 'AHPs'. Additionally, the UK AHP professional bodies were contacted requesting their guidelines. STUDY SELECTION: Articles exploring telehealth for patient consultations, written in English and published in peer-reviewed journal or guidelines available from UK AHP professional bodies/their websites were considered eligible for review. DATA EXTRACTION: One reviewer extracted data concerning three overarching domains: implementation, financial and technological considerations. RESULTS: 2632 articles were identified through database searches with 21 articles eligible for review. Eight guidelines were obtained from the UK AHP professional bodies with a total of 29 included articles/guidelines. Most articles were published in the last two years; there was variety in telehealth terminology, and most were developed for occupational therapists, physiotherapists and speech and language therapists. Information was lacking about the assessment of telehealth use and effectiveness, barriers and limitations, the logistical management, the family's and caregiver's roles and the costs. There was lack of clarity on the AHPs' registration requirements, costs and coverage, and legal aspects. CONCLUSION: This study identified gaps in current guidelines, which showed similarities as well as discrepancies with the guidance for non-AHP healthcare professionals and revealed that the existing guidelines do not adequately support AHPs delivering telehealth consultations. Future research and collaborative work across AHP groups and the world's leading health institutions are suggested to establish common guidelines that will improve AHP telehealth services.

How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected orthotic services in the United Kingdom?

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the National Health Service in the United Kingdom (UK). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the impact of COVID-19 on orthotic services in the United Kingdom. STUDY DESIGN: Cross sectional survey. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to UK orthotists approximately 6 months after the first peak of COVID-19. Descriptive statistics of results related to appointment waiting times, disruption of services, introduction of telehealth appointments, and clinicians' opinions on the impact of COVID-19 was completed. RESULTS: Seventy-seven orthotists completed the survey, with many reporting that their service was closed or open only to inpatients/urgent patients at some point during the pandemic. There were substantial variation in appointment waiting times, time allocated per appointment, and increases in lead times for orthotic products across services. Over 90% reported using telehealth appointments. Results were comparable with previous research showing long appointment waiting times and indicated that the pandemic has added to this issue. CONCLUSIONS: The pandemic has had a significant impact on orthotic services with face-to-face appointments largely reserved for urgent patients and inpatients, and services going through stages of closing and reopening, alongside the introduction of telehealth to ensure less urgent patients could continue to access orthotic care. Future service evaluation studies are required to further assess how orthotic services have been affected by the pandemic and the effectiveness of recovery plans.

A low-cost field ventilator: An urgent global need.

Modern ventilators are increasingly compact and able to deliver a wide range of ventilator modes and sophisticated monitoring capabilities. However, the global availability of ventilators is woefully short of demand. Data on intensive care units (ICUs), a proxy measure for hospital ventilator capacity in low and middle-income countries (LMIC's), suggest that capacity is extremely limited where it exists at all. In LMIC's, the four most common indications for mechanical ventilation (MV) in ICUs are post-surgical care, sepsis, trauma, and maternal peripartum or neonatal complications. A significant majority of these cases can be managed with intervention involving a short course of MV. Widespread and timely access to MV can thus effectively be used to help patients in these settings and improve outcomes. This paper implores this need and highlights the requirements for a low-cost ventilator or a respiratory support device.