Sociodemographic Trends in Telemedicine Visit Completion in Spine Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: This study identifies potential disparities in telemedicine utilization in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and its aftermath in patients receiving spine surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: COVID-19 led to the rapid uptake of telemedicine in the spine surgery patient population. While previous studies in other medical subspecialties have identified sociodemographic disparities in telemedicine uptake, this is the first study to identify disparities in patients undergoing spine surgery. METHODS: This study included patients who underwent spine surgery between June 12, 2018 and July 19, 2021. Patients were required to have at least one scheduled patient visit, either virtual (video or telephone visit) or in-person. Binary socioeconomic variables used for modeling included: urbanicity, age at time of procedure, sex, race, ethnicity, language, primary insurer, and patient portal utilization. Analyses were conducted for the entire cohort and separately for cohorts of patients who had visits scheduled within specific timeframes: Pre-COVID-19 surge, initial COVID-19 surge, and post-COVID-19 surge. RESULTS: After adjusting for all variables in our multivariable analysis, patients who utilized the patient portal had higher odds of completing a video visit compared to those who did not (OR: 5.21; 95% CI: 1.28, 21.23). Hispanic patients (OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.2, 0.98) or those living in rural areas (OR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.93) had lower odds of completing a telephone visit. Patients with no insurance or on public insurance had higher odds of completing a virtual visit of either type (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.10, 3.23). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the disparity in telemedicine utilization across different populations within the surgical spine patient population. Surgeons may use this information to guide interventions aimed at reducing existing disparities and work with certain patient populations to find a solution.

Teledermatology May Benefit Marginalized Populations: National and Institutional Trends during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Limited data exist regarding demographic-specific teledermatology (TD) utilization during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study aimed to determine TD utilization trends during the pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study for national and institutional populations was conducted. Patient encounters in the American Academy of Dermatology's DataDerm registry (DataDerm) were analyzed from 1 April 2020 through 30 June 2021. All dermatological patients seen by Duke University Health Systems (DUHS) were analyzed from 1 March 2020 through 30 April 2021. In-person clinic visits versus TD encounters (national and institutional) and no-show rates (institutional only) were collected for visit type (i.e., TD versus in-person), sex, race, age/generation, and in- versus out-of-state location (national only). TD utilization is defined as the cohort of interest using TD (e.g., females, whites) within a demographic group (i.e., sex, race) as a percentage of total TD users. This was compared with in-person utilization during the identical timeframe. RESULTS: For US national data, 13,964,816 encounters were analyzed. Sex, race, age, and location each had a significant association with TD utilization (adjusted p < 0.001). For institutional data, 54,400 encounters were analyzed. Sex, race, and age had a significant association with TD utilization (adjusted p < 0.001). Both datasets revealed majority female populations for telehealth visits (DataDerm 66.0%; DUHS 61.7%). Non-white populations accounted for a higher percentage of TD utilizers (DataDerm 15.0%; DUHS 37.3%) when compared with in-person utilizers (DataDerm 11.7%; DUHS 22.3%). Younger patients utilized TD (DataDerm 63.6%; DUHS 62.6%) more than in-person services (DataDerm 26.3%; DUHS 43.8%). Institutional no-show rates between telehealth and in-person visits were lower for Black patients (11.8% versus 19.2%), other non-white races (10.6% versus 13.6%), and younger ages/generations (9.8% versus 12.8%), respectively. TD utilization decreased over time nationally as a percentage of total visits (2.9% versus 0.3%) in 2020 versus 2021, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, certain populations (females, younger patients, non-white races) showed higher TD utilization. Understanding TD utilization trends is critical in defining the role of virtual care for improving universal care access, optimizing resources, and informing future healthcare models for all patient populations.

Low utilisation of bronchoscopy to assess COVID-19 respiratory infection: a multicenter experience.

OBJECTIVE: For the diagnosis of COVID-19, the yield of nasopharyngeal (NP) swabs is unclear, and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is obtained to confirm the diagnosis. We assessed the utilisation of bronchoscopy for COVID-19 diagnosis in a multicenter study and compared the diagnostic yield of BAL versus NP swabs. METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients who were admitted with clinical presentation concerning for COVID-19 and underwent BAL from 1 March to 31 July 2020 at four tertiary care centres in North America. We also compared concordance of BAL with NP swabs for diagnosis of COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients, with clinical suspicion for COVID-19 and admitted for respiratory failure, underwent bronchoscopy to collect BAL for SARS-CoV-2 testing. During the same period, 2039 bronchoscopies were performed on patients not infected with COVID-19. Of 42 patients with NP swabs and BAL collected within ≤7 days, 1 was NP swab negative but positive by BAL for SARS-CoV-2 (n=1/42 (2.4%)). Across a wide array of testing platforms, the overall agreement between NP swabs and BAL results was 97.6% (95% CI: 93.0% to 100%) with Cohen's k of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.69 to 1.00). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of NP swabs compared with BAL were 83.3% (95% CI: 53.5% to 100%), 100%, 100% and 97.3% (95% CI: 92.1% to 100%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: BAL was used infrequently to assess COVID-19 in busy institutions. NP swabs have a high concordance with BAL for COVID-19 testing, but negative NP swabs should be confirmed with BAL when clinical suspicion is high.

Tracheostomy for COVID-19 Respiratory Failure: Multidisciplinary, Multicenter Data on Timing, Technique, and Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19 respiratory failure. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Tracheostomy has an essential role in managing COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure who require prolonged mechanical ventilation. However, limited data are available on how tracheostomy affects COVID-19 outcomes, and uncertainty surrounding risk of infectious transmission has led to divergent recommendations and practices. METHODS: It is a multicenter, retrospective study; data were collected on all tracheostomies performed in COVID-19 patients at 7 hospitals in 5 tertiary academic medical systems from February 1, 2020 to September 4, 2020. RESULT: Tracheotomy was performed in 118 patients with median time from intubation to tracheostomy of 22 days (Q1-Q3: 18-25). All tracheostomies were performed employing measures to minimize aerosol generation, 78.0% by percutaneous technique, and 95.8% at bedside in negative pressure rooms. Seventy-eight (66.1%) patients were weaned from the ventilator and 18 (15.3%) patients died from causes unrelated to tracheostomy. No major procedural complications occurred. Early tracheostomy (≤14 days) was associated with decreased ventilator days; median ventilator days (Q1-Q3) among patients weaned from the ventilator in the early, middle and late groups were 21 (21-31), 34 (26.5-42), and 37 (32-41) days, respectively with P = 0.030. Compared to surgical tracheostomy, percutaneous technique was associated with faster weaning for patients weaned off the ventilator [median (Q1-Q3): 34 (29-39) vs 39 (34-51) days, P = 0.038]; decreased ventilator-associated pneumonia (58.7% vs 80.8%, P = 0.039); and among patients who were discharged, shorter intensive care unit duration [median (Q1-Q3): 33 (27-42) vs 47 (33-64) days, P = 0.009]; and shorter hospital length of stay [median (Q1-Q3): 46 (33-59) vs 59.5 (48-80) days, P = 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Early, percutaneous tracheostomy was associated with improved outcomes compared to surgical tracheostomy in a multi-institutional series of ventilated patients with COVID-19.