ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Telehealth was rapidly adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic. A survey was distributed to neurosurgeons in the United States (US) to understand its use within neurosurgery, what barriers exist, unique issues related to neurosurgery, and opportunities for improvement. METHODS: A survey was distributed via email and used the SurveyMonkey platform. The survey was sent to 3,828 practicing neurosurgeons within the US 404 responses were collected between Oct. 30, 2021, through Dec. 4, 2021. RESULTS: During the pandemic, telehealth was used multiple times per week by 60.65% and used daily by an additional 12.78% of respondents. A supermajority (89.84%) of respondents felt that evaluating patients across state lines with telemedicine is beneficial. Most respondents (95.81%) believed that telehealth improves patient access to care. The major criticism of telehealth was the inability to perform a neurological exam. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth has been widely implemented within the field of neurosurgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and has increased access to care. It has allowed patients to be evaluated remotely, including across state lines. While certain aspects of the neurological exam are suited for video evaluation, sensation and reflexes cannot be adequately assessed. Neurosurgeons believe that telehealth adds value to their ability to deliver care.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neurosurgery , Telemedicine , Humans , Neurosurgeons , SARS-CoV-2 , United StatesABSTRACT
We read, with tremendous gratitude, Dr. Oleske and Dr. Bogden's comment in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health titled, "Blood Lead Concentrations in Newark Children" [...].
Subject(s)
Lead , Public Health , Child , Humans , New Jersey , Schools, MedicalABSTRACT
Many have referred to the coronavirus disease 2019 crisis and intertwined issues of structural racism as "twin pandemics". As healthcare workers in Newark, New Jersey, a city heavily affected by the twin pandemics, we recognize that health workforce changes must be grounded in our community's recent history. The objective of this essay is to briefly describe the relationship between organized medicine, state and local leaders, and the people of Newark. We begin with a discussion of Newark in the 1950s and 1960s: its people experienced poor socioeconomic conditions, terrible medical care, and the many sequelae of abhorrent racism. Plans to establish a New Jersey Medical School in Newark's Central Ward also threatened to displace many residents from their homes. We then describe the Newark Agreements of 1968, which formalized a social contract between the state, business leaders, and people of Newark. In part, the Medical School committed to indefinitely promoting public health in Newark. We share progress towards this goal. Finally, we document key healthcare administrative decisions facing our community today. Stakeholder opinions are shared. We conclude that the Newark Agreements set an important standard for communities across the country. Creative solutions to healthcare policy may be realized through extensive community collaboration.