ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE(S): Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents an enormous challenge to healthcare systems globally. Optimizing access to healthcare while minimizing face-to-face patient encounters is critical to limiting exposures, conserving resources, and preserving health. We aimed to evaluate the utility of a COVID-focused telehealth program in avoiding potential in-person visits while maintaining high patient satisfaction. METHODS: All patients with COVID-related virtual visits at our center between March and May 2020 were included. Demographic, satisfaction, and clinical information were gathered using a modified, validated telehealth satisfaction questionnaire disseminated via email or telephone. Data were analyzed using Stata. RESULTS: Of 581 eligible patients, 180 (31%) responded to the survey. Symptoms (73%) and possible exposure (22%) were the main reasons cited for pursuing a virtual visit; cough (44%) and fever (36%) were the most common presenting symptoms. Regarding patient satisfaction, most patients rated the experience as "very good" or "excellent", and 94% of respondents said they would recommend COVID-focused triage through telehealth to others. Over 81% of patients indicated that, if telehealth was not an option, they would have sought an in-person encounter. Ultimately, only 27% of patients reported pursuing a face-to-face encounter after participating in the virtual visit. CONCLUSION: Based on patient self-reporting, telemedicine potentially prevented face-to-face COVID-related encounters. Patients expressed satisfaction with the virtual process and were less likely to pursue in-person consultation. Leveraging a telehealth strategy for forward triage has the potential to reduce exposures while conserving healthcare resources.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicine , Triage , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Patient Satisfaction , SARS-CoV-2 , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To review the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on stroke care-metrics and report data from a health system in Houston. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of the published literature reporting stroke admissions, intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) cases, number of thrombolysis (tPA) and thrombectomy (MT) cases, and time metrics (door to needle, DTN; and door to groin time, DTG) during the pandemic compared to prepandemic period. Within our hospital system, between January-June 2019 and January-June 2020, we compared the proportion of stroke admissions and door to tPA and MT times. RESULTS: A total of 32,640 stroke admissions from 29 studies were assessed. Compared to prepandemic period, the mean ratio of stroke admissions during the pandemic was 70.78% [95% CI, 65.02%, 76.54%], ICH cases was 83.10% [95% CI, 71.01%, 95.17%], tPA cases was 81.74% [95% CI, 72.33%, 91.16%], and MT cases was 88.63% [95% CI, 74.12%, 103.13%], whereas DTN time was 104.48% [95% CI, 95.52%, 113.44%] and DTG was 104.30% [95% CI, 81.99%, 126.61%]. In Houston, a total of 4808 cases were assessed. There was an initial drop of ~30% in cases at the pandemic onset. Compared to 2019, there was a significant reduction in mild strokes (NIHSS 1-5) [N (%), 891 (43) vs 635 (40), P = 0.02]. There were similar mean (SD) (mins) DTN [44 (17) vs 42 (17), P = 0.14] but significantly prolonged DTG times [94 (15) vs 85 (20), P = 0.005] in 2020. INTERPRETATION: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a global reduction in stroke admissions and treatment interventions and prolonged treatment time metrics.