Telehealth versus face-to-face visits: A comprehensive outpatient perspective-based cohort study of patients with kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Telenephrology has become an important health care delivery modality during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known about patient perspectives on the quality of care provided via telenephrology compared to face-to-face visits. We aimed to use objective data to study patients' perspectives on outpatient nephrology care received via telenephrology (phone and video) versus face-to-face visits. METHODS: We retrospectively studied adults who received care in the outpatient Nephrology & Hypertension division at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from March to July 2020. We used a standardized survey methodology to evaluate patient satisfaction. The primary outcome was the percent of patients who responded with a score of good (4) or very good (5) on a 5-point Likert scale on survey questions that asked their perspectives on access to their nephrologist, relationship with care provider, their opinions on the telenephrology technology, and their overall assessment of the care received. Wilcoxon rank sum tests and chi-square tests were used as appropriate to compare telenephrology versus face-to-face visits. RESULTS: 3,486 of the patient encounters were face-to-face, 808 phone and 317 video visits. 443 patients responded to satisfaction surveys, and 21% of these had telenephrology encounters. Established patients made up 79.6% of telenephrology visits and 60.9% of face-to-face visits. There was no significant difference in patient perceived access to health care, satisfaction with their care provider, or overall quality of care between patients cared for via telenephrology versus face-to-face. Patient satisfaction was also equally high. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction was equally high amongst those patients seen face-to-face or via telenephrology.

Serum neurofilament light protein correlates with unfavorable clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Brain imaging studies of patients with COVID-19 show evidence of macro- and microhemorrhagic lesions, multifocal white matter hyperintensities, and lesions consistent with posterior reversible leukoencephalopathy. Imaging studies, however, are subject to selection bias, and prospective studies are challenging to scale. Here, we evaluated whether serum neurofilament light chain (NFL), a neuroaxonal injury marker, could predict the extent of neuronal damage in a cohort of 142 hospitalized patients with COVID-19. NFL was elevated in the serum of patients with COVID-19 compared to healthy controls, including those without overt neurological manifestations. Higher NFL serum concentrations were associated with worse clinical outcomes. In 100 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with remdesivir, a trend toward lower NFL serum concentrations was observed. These data suggest that patients with COVID-19 may experience neuroaxonal injury and may be at risk for long-term neurological sequelae. Neuroaxonal injury should be considered as an outcome in acute pharmacotherapeutic trials for COVID-19.