Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
Prim Care ; 49(4): 531-541, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2081798

ABSTRACT

Asynchronous telehealth provides a viable option for improving access in a convenient and timely manner to patients seeking care as well as for physicians seeking subspecialty consultation. Access to technology, clear guidelines, standards, and expectations is required for this innovation to function well. Limitations in access due to patient and technology factors is an area that requires attention. Positive impact on access and quality has been demonstrated. Rapid development continues and was enhanced with the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicine , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/therapy , Referral and Consultation
2.
BMC Prim Care ; 23: 4, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690969

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of chat-based digital visits (eVisits) to assess infectious symptoms in primary care is rapidly increasing. The "digi-physical" model of care uses eVisits as the first line of assessment while assuming a certain proportion of patients will inevitably need to be further assessed through urgent physical examination within 48 h. It is unclear to what extent this approach can mitigate physical visits compared to assessing patients directly using office visits. METHODS: This pre-COVID-19-pandemic observational study followed up "digi-physical" eVisit patients (n = 1188) compared to office visit patients (n = 599) with respiratory or urinary symptoms. Index visits occurred between March 30th 2016 and March 29th 2019. The primary outcome was subsequent physical visits to physicians within two weeks using registry data from Skåne county, Sweden (Region Skånes Vårddatabas, RSVD). RESULTS: No significant differences in subsequent physical visits within two weeks (excluding the first 48 h) were noted following "digi-physical" care compared to office visits (179 (18.0%) vs. 102 (17.6%), P = .854). As part of the "digital-physical" concept, a significantly larger proportion of eVisit patients had a physical visit within 48 h compared to corresponding office visit patients (191 (16.1%) vs. 19 (3.2%), P < .001), with 150 (78.5%) of these eVisit patients recommended some form of follow-up by the eVisit physician. CONCLUSIONS: Most eVisit patients (68.9%) with respiratory and urinary symptoms have no subsequent physical visits. Beyond an unavoidable portion of patients requiring urgent physical examination within 48 h, "digi-physical" management of respiratory and urinary symptoms results in comparable subsequent health care utilization compared to office visits. eVisit providers may need to optimize use of resources to minimize the proportion of patients being assessed both digitally and physically within 48 h as part of the "digi-physical" concept. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03474887. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01618-2.

3.
Epilepsy Res ; 176: 106689, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1303518

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to assess the role of prior experience with virtual care (through e-visits) in maintaining continuity in ambulatory epilepsy care during an unprecedented pandemic situation, comparing in person versus e-visit clinic uptake. METHODS: This is an observational study on virtual epilepsy care (through e-visits) over two years, during a pre-COVID period (14 months) continuing into the COVID-19 pandemic period (10 months). For a small initial section of patients seen during the study period a physician survey and a patient satisfaction survey were completed (n = 53). Outcomes of eVisits were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Median numbers of epilepsy clinic visits conducted during the COVID-19 period (27.5 new and 113 follow up) remained similar to the median uptake during the pre-COVID period (28 new and 116 follow up). Prior experience with e-visits for epilepsy yielded smooth transition into the pandemic period, with several other advantages. The majority of eVisits were successful despite technical difficulties and major components of history and management were still easily implemented. Results from patient surveys supported that a significant amount of time and money were saved, which was in keeping with our health-economic analysis. CONCLUSION: Our study is one of the first few reports of fully integrated virtual care in a comprehensive epilepsy clinic starting much before start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results of our study support the feasibility of using virtual care to deliver specialized outpatient care in a comprehensive epilepsy center.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Epilepsy/therapy , Telemedicine/methods , User-Computer Interface , Adult , Aged , Efficiency, Organizational , Epilepsy/diagnosis , Epilepsy/economics , Female , Health Care Costs , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Male , Medical History Taking/methods , Middle Aged , Ontario , Patient Satisfaction , Patient-Centered Care , Telemedicine/economics , Young Adult
4.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(5): e27531, 2021 05 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1217026

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Electronic visits (e-visits) involve asynchronous communication between clinicians and patients through a secure web-based platform, such as a patient portal, to elicit symptoms and determine a diagnosis and treatment plan. E-visits are now reimbursable through Medicare due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The state of evidence regarding e-visits, such as the impact on clinical outcomes and health care delivery, is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To address this gap, we examine how e-visits have impacted clinical outcomes and health care quality, access, utilization, and costs. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review; MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through October 2020 for peer-reviewed studies that assessed e-visits' impacts on clinical and health care delivery outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 1859 papers, 19 met the inclusion criteria. E-visit usage was associated with improved or comparable clinical outcomes, especially for chronic disease management (eg, diabetes care, blood pressure management). The impact on quality of care varied across conditions. Quality of care was equivalent or better for chronic conditions, but variable quality was observed in infection management (eg, appropriate antibiotic prescribing). Similarly, the impact on health care utilization varied across conditions (eg, lower utilization for dermatology but mixed impact in primary care). Health care costs were lower for e-visits than those for in-person visits for a wide range of conditions (eg, dermatology and acute visits). No studies examined the impact of e-visits on health care access. It is difficult to draw firm conclusions about effectiveness or impact on care delivery from the studies that were included because many used observational designs. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the evidence suggests e-visits may provide clinical outcomes that are comparable to those provided by in-person care and reduce health care costs for certain health care conditions. At the same time, there is mixed evidence on health care quality, especially regarding infection management (eg, sinusitis, urinary tract infections, conjunctivitis). Further studies are needed to test implementation strategies that might improve delivery (eg, clinical decision support for antibiotic prescribing) and to assess which conditions can be managed via e-visits.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Delivery of Health Care/methods , Telemedicine/methods , Communication , Electronics , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification
5.
Pediatr Rheumatol Online J ; 18(1): 85, 2020 Oct 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-901891

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of telemedicine in pediatric rheumatology has been historically low. The current COVID 19 global pandemic has forced a paradigm shift with many centers rapidly adopting virtual visits to conduct care resulting in rapid expansion of use of telemedicine amongst practices. BODY: This commentary discusses practical tips for physicians including guidance around administrative and governance issues, preparation for telemedicine, involving the multidisciplinary care team, and teaching considerations. We also outline a standard proforma and smart phrases for the electronic health record. A proposed variation of the validated pediatric gait arms legs spine examination (pGALS) called the video pGALS (VpGALS) as a means of conducting virtual pediatric rheumatology physical examination is presented. CONCLUSION: This commentary provides a starting framework for telemedicine use in pediatric rheumatology and further work on validation and acceptability is needed.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Pandemics , Pediatrics/methods , Physical Examination/methods , Pneumonia, Viral , Rheumatology/methods , Telemedicine/methods , Videoconferencing , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Delivery of Health Care , Europe , Humans , Patient Selection , Pediatrics/education , Pediatrics/organization & administration , Rheumatology/education , Rheumatology/organization & administration , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/legislation & jurisprudence , Telemedicine/organization & administration , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL