Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 299
Filter
1.
Hypertension ; 76(5): 1368-1383, 2020 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2153222

ABSTRACT

Telemedicine allows the remote exchange of medical data between patients and healthcare professionals. It is used to increase patients' access to care and provide effective healthcare services at a distance. During the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has thrived and emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the management of isolated patients due to lockdown or shielding, including those with hypertension. The best proposed healthcare model for telemedicine in hypertension management should include remote monitoring and transmission of vital signs (notably blood pressure) and medication adherence plus education on lifestyle and risk factors, with video consultation as an option. The use of mixed automated feedback services with supervision of a multidisciplinary clinical team (physician, nurse, or pharmacist) is the ideal approach. The indications include screening for suspected hypertension, management of older adults, medically underserved people, high-risk hypertensive patients, patients with multiple diseases, and those isolated due to pandemics or national emergencies.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Cross Infection/prevention & control , Hypertension/drug therapy , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Blood Pressure Determination/methods , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Disease Management , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Humans , Hypertension/diagnosis , Italy , Male , Occupational Health , Pandemics/statistics & numerical data , Patient Safety , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Severity of Illness Index
2.
J Clin Psychiatry ; 82(2)2021 Mar 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2066787

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Most research evaluating telehealth psychiatric treatment has been conducted in outpatient settings. There is a great lack of research assessing the efficacy of telehealth treatment in more acute, intensive treatment settings such as a partial hospital. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, much of behavioral health treatment has transitioned to a virtual format. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we examined the effectiveness of our partial hospital program (PHP). METHOD: The sample included 207 patients who were treated virtually from May 2020 to September 2020 and a comparison group of 207 patients who were treated in the in-person partial program a year earlier. Patients completed self-administered measures of patient satisfaction, symptoms, coping ability, functioning, and general well-being. RESULTS: For both the in-person and telehealth methods of delivering partial hospital level of care, patients were highly satisfied with treatment and reported a significant reduction in symptoms and suicidality from admission to discharge. On the modified Remission from Depression Questionnaire, the primary outcome measure, both groups reported a significant (P < .01) improvement in functioning, coping ability, positive mental health, and general well-being. A large effect size of treatment (Cohen d > 0.8) was found in both treatment groups. The only significant difference in outcome between the patients treated in the different formats was a greater length of stay (mean ± SD of 13.5 ± 8.1 vs 8.5 ± 5.0 days, t = 7.61, P < .001) and greater likelihood of staying in treatment until completion (72.9% vs 62.3%, χ2 = 5.34, P < .05) in the virtually treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth partial hospital treatment was as effective as in-person treatment in terms of patient satisfaction, symptom reduction, suicidal ideation reduction, and improved functioning and well-being. The treatment completion rate was higher in the telehealth cohort, and several patients who were treated virtually commented that they never would have presented for in-person treatment even if there was no pandemic. Telehealth PHPs should be considered a viable treatment option even after the pandemic has resolved.


Subject(s)
Behavior Therapy , COVID-19 , Emergency Services, Psychiatric , Mental Disorders , Telemedicine , Adult , Behavior Therapy/methods , Behavior Therapy/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Emergency Services, Psychiatric/methods , Emergency Services, Psychiatric/trends , Female , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Infection Control/methods , Male , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Disorders/therapy , Mental Health/trends , Patient Safety , Patient Satisfaction , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/methods , Telemedicine/organization & administration , United States/epidemiology
3.
Indian J Palliat Care ; 26(Suppl 1): S40-S44, 2020 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1792227

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) has usurped human peace and mobility. The confinement of the population and the rising epidemic has disrupted the routine care for non-COVID-19 patients. Telehealth is a growing field, and its application in palliative care is seen as a solution to serve the population in this difficult crisis. METHODOLOGY: A exploratory survey was designed to assess the changes in the hospital-based practice of palliative care in the COVID-19 pandemic and patient/caregiver's perception about the provision of telehealth services to palliative care patients of a tertiary care cancer hospital of eastern India. RESULTS: There was a dramatic reduction in the outpatient clinic footfalls by 51% with teleconsultation. Although there was no change in the number of emergency visits, the inpatient admissions reduced by 44%. Nearly 82% of patient/caregivers gave a positive feedback about telemedicine care provided by the department and mentioned that the service provided them with support and connectedness. Almost 64% of the patients and caregivers reported that the service helped allay the fear and reassured them that there was a someone to support them. As high as 76% of the participants felt that they would prefer teleconsultation in future and were ready to pay for teleconsultations if charges were to be applied in the future. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine is an important tool and an essential service to care for palliative care patients in the community especially when the patient and health-care professionals are separated by a pandemic or natural disaster.

4.
Inflamm Bowel Dis ; 28(3): 358-363, 2022 03 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1769283

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated synchronous audiovisual telehealth and audio-only visits for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) to determine frequency of successful telehealth visits and determine what factors increase the likelihood of completion. METHODS: Data were collected from March to July 2020 in a tertiary care adult IBD clinic that was transitioned to a fully telehealth model. A protocol for telehealth was implemented. A retrospective analysis was performed using electronic medical record (EMR) data. All patients were scheduled for video telehealth. If this failed, providers attempted to conduct the visit as audio only. RESULTS: Between March and July 2020, 2571 telehealth visits were scheduled for adult patients with IBD. Of these, 2498 (99%) were successfully completed by video or phone. Sixty percent were female, and the median age was 41 years. Eighty six percent of the population was white, 8% black, 2% other, and 4% were missing. Seventy-five percent had commercial insurance, 15% had Medicare, 5% had Medicaid, and 5% had other insurance. No significant factors were found for an attempted but completely failed visit. Using a multivariate logistic regression model, increasing age (odds ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.55-2.08; P < 0.05), noncommercial insurance status (odds ratio, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.61-2.21; P < 0.05), and black race (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.38-3.08; P < 0.05) increased the likelihood of a video encounter failure. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high success rate for telehealth within an IBD population with defined clinic protocols. Certain patient characteristics such as age, race, and health insurance type increase the risk of failure of a video visit.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases , Telemedicine , Adult , Aged , Demography , Female , Humans , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/epidemiology , Inflammatory Bowel Diseases/therapy , Medicare , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology
5.
Neuromodulation ; 24(2): 337-342, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1599565

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To explore the utility of deep brain stimulation (DBS) telemedicine in the management of patients with movement disorders from January 2019 to March 2020, covering the main period of the COVID-19 outbreak in China. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained data from 40 hospitals around China that employed DBS tele-programming for their outpatients with Parkinson's disease or dystonia from January 2019 to March 2020. Data were obtained on the number and nature of patients' DBS health care service requests, reasons for their requests, the number of DBS telemedicine sessions subsequently completed, safety issues, and the patients' satisfaction with the DBS tele-programing parameter adjustments made. RESULTS: There were 909 DBS tele-programming health service requests (from 196 patients) completed during the study period. The results showed: 1) the number of DBS telemedicine sessions requested and the number of patients examined increased during the COVID-19 outbreak in February and March 2020 when compared with the monthly numbers in 2019; 2) the most common reason for the patients' health service requests was poor symptom control; 3) the most common DBS tele-programming adjustment made was voltage change; 4) overall, most (89%) DBS tele-programming adjustment sessions were experienced by the patients as satisfactory; and 5) significant adverse events and unexpected treatment interruptions caused by connection failure or other hardware- or software-related problems did not occur. CONCLUSIONS: DBS telemedicine could have a unique role to play in maintaining the delivery of DBS treatment and medical care to outpatients with movement disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Deep Brain Stimulation/methods , Movement Disorders/therapy , Pandemics , Telemedicine/methods , Adult , Aged , Ambulatory Care , China , Deep Brain Stimulation/adverse effects , Deep Brain Stimulation/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Satisfaction , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data
6.
Telemed J E Health ; 27(12): 1399-1408, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1575692

ABSTRACT

Background: Little is known about specialty mental health and/or substance use disorder (MH/SUD) clinicians' experiences transitioning from in-person to telehealth care, to treat a diagnostically diverse population during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Survey of outpatient MH/SUD clinicians (psychiatrists, nurse practitioners, psychologists, and licensed clinical social workers; N = 107) at a psychiatric hospital. Clinician satisfaction and experiences using telehealth across a variety of services (individual, group or family therapy, initial assessments, evaluation and management, and neuropsychological assessment) were assessed using a mixed-methods approach. Results: Across services, a majority agreed/strongly agreed that telehealth provided an opportunity to build rapport with patients (67-88%) and they could treat their patients' needs well (71-88%). The interest in continuing to use telehealth when in-person visits resume varied by type of service provided (50-71%). Group therapy and initial assessment were lowest (50% and 51%, respectively). Clinicians noted telehealth improved access to care for patients with logistical barriers, competing demands, mobility difficulties, and medical concerns; but was more challenging to care for patients with certain psychiatric characteristics (e.g., psychosis, paranoia, catatonia, high distractibility, and avoidance), high symptom severity, or who needed to improve social skills. Telehealth influenced the therapeutic process (e.g., observations of family dynamic, increased patient/clinician therapeutic alliance). Discussion and Conclusions: MH/SUD clinicians who quickly transitioned to telehealth care during the pandemic were largely satisfied with telehealth, but also identified challenges related to specific patient characteristics, or types of MH/SUD services. These observations warrant additional study to better delineate the role for an expanded use of telehealth postpandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicine , Humans , Mental Health , Outpatients , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
7.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(2): e23795, 2021 02 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574557

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It has been widely communicated that individuals with underlying health conditions are at higher risk of severe disease due to COVID-19 than healthy peers. As social distancing measures continue during the COVID-19 pandemic, experts encourage individuals with underlying conditions to engage in telehealth appointments to maintain continuity of care while minimizing risk exposure. To date, however, little information has been provided regarding telehealth uptake among this high-risk population. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to describe the telehealth use, resource needs, and information sources of individuals with chronic conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Secondary objectives include exploring differences in telehealth use by sociodemographic characteristics. METHODS: Data for this study were collected through an electronic survey distributed between May 12-14, 2020, to members of 26 online health communities for individuals with chronic disease. Descriptive statistics were run to explore telehealth use, support needs, and information sources, and z tests were run to assess differences in sociodemographic factors and information and support needs among those who did and did not use telehealth services. RESULTS: Among the 2210 respondents, 1073 (49%) reported engaging in telehealth in the past 4 months. Higher proportions of women engaged in telehealth than men (890/1781, 50% vs 181/424, 43%; P=.007), and a higher proportion of those earning household incomes of more than US $100,000 engaged in telehealth than those earning less than US $30,000 (195/370, 53% vs 241/530 45%; P=.003). Although 59% (133/244) of those younger than 40 years and 54% (263/486) of those aged 40-55 years used telehealth, aging populations were less likely to do so, with only 45% (677/1500) of individuals 56 years or older reporting telehealth use (P<.001 and P=.001, respectively). Patients with cystic fibrosis, lupus, and ankylosing spondylitis recorded the highest proportions of individuals using telehealth when compared to those with other diagnoses. Of the 2210 participants, 1333 (60%) participants either looked up information about the virus online or planned to in the future, and when asked what information or support would be most helpful right now, over half (1151/2210, 52%) responded "understanding how COVID-19 affects people with my health condition." CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of the study sample reported participating in telehealth in the past 4 months. Future efforts to engage individuals with underlying medical conditions in telehealth should focus on outreach to men, members of lower-income households, and aging populations. These results may help inform and refine future health communications to further engage this at-risk population in telehealth as the pandemic continues.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnosis , Telemedicine/methods , Chronic Disease , Female , Humans , Internet , Learning Health System , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
8.
Am J Speech Lang Pathol ; 30(2): 598-608, 2021 Mar 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1545664

ABSTRACT

Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically increased the use of telehealth. Prior studies of telehealth clinical swallowing evaluations provide positive evidence for telemanagement of swallowing. However, the reliability of these measures in clinical practice, as opposed to well-controlled research conditions, remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the reliability of outcome measures derived from clinical swallowing tele-evaluations in real-world clinical practice (e.g., variability in devices and Internet connectivity, lack of in-person clinician assistance, or remote patient/caregiver training). Method Seven raters asynchronously judged clinical swallowing tele-evaluations of 12 movement disorders patients. Outcomes included the Timed Water Swallow Test (TWST), Test of Masticating and Swallowing Solids (TOMASS), and common observations of oral intake. Statistical analyses were performed to examine inter- and intrarater reliability, as well as qualitative analyses exploring patient and clinician-specific factors impacting reliability. Results Forty-four trials were included for reliability analyses. All rater dyads demonstrated "good" to "excellent" interrater reliability for measures of the TWST (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs] ≥ .93) and observations of oral intake (≥ 77% agreement). The majority of TOMASS outcomes demonstrated "good" to "excellent" interrater reliability (ICCs ≥ .84), with the exception of the number of bites (ICCs = .43-.99) and swallows (ICCs = .21-.85). Immediate and delayed intrarater reliability were "excellent" for most raters across all tasks, ranging between ICCs of .63 and 1.00. Exploratory factors potentially impacting reliability included infrequent instances of suboptimal video quality, reduced camera stability, camera distance, and obstruction of the patient's mouth during tasks. Conclusions Subjective observations of oral intake and objective measures taken from the TWST and the TOMASS can be reliably measured via telehealth in clinical practice. Our results provide support for the feasibility and reliability of telehealth for outpatient clinical swallowing evaluations during COVID-19 and beyond. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13661378.


Subject(s)
Deglutition Disorders/therapy , Deglutition/physiology , Speech-Language Pathology/methods , Telemedicine/methods , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/epidemiology , Deglutition Disorders/etiology , Female , Humans , Lewy Body Disease/complications , Male , Middle Aged , Multiple System Atrophy/complications , Pandemics , Parkinson Disease/complications , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine/standards
9.
Clin Orthop Relat Res ; 479(7): 1417-1425, 2021 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1511052

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare disparities are well documented across multiple subspecialties in orthopaedics. The widespread implementation of telemedicine risks worsening these disparities if not carefully executed, despite original assumptions that telemedicine improves overall access to care. Telemedicine also poses unique challenges such as potential language or technological barriers that may alter previously described patterns in orthopaedic disparities. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Are the proportions of patients who use telemedicine across orthopaedic services different among (1) racial and ethnic minorities, (2) non-English speakers, and (3) patients insured through Medicaid during a 10-week period after the implementation of telemedicine in our healthcare system compared with in-person visits during a similar time period in 2019? METHODS: This was a retrospective comparative study using electronic medical record data to compare new patients establishing orthopaedic care via outpatient telemedicine at two academic urban medical centers between March 2020 and May 2020 with new orthopaedic patients during the same 10-week period in 2019. A total of 11,056 patients were included for analysis, with 1760 in the virtual group and 9296 in the control group. Unadjusted analyses demonstrated patients in the virtual group were younger (median age 57 years versus 59 years; p < 0.001), but there were no differences with regard to gender (56% female versus 56% female; p = 0.66). We used self-reported race or ethnicity as our primary independent variable, with primary language and insurance status considered secondarily. Unadjusted and multivariable adjusted analyses were performed for our primary and secondary predictors using logistic regression. We also assessed interactions between race or ethnicity, primary language, and insurance type. RESULTS: After adjusting for age, gender, subspecialty, insurance, and median household income, we found that patients who were Hispanic (odds ratio 0.59 [95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.91]; p = 0.02) or Asian were less likely (OR 0.73 [95% CI 0.53 to 0.99]; p = 0.04) to be seen through telemedicine than were patients who were white. After controlling for confounding variables, we also found that speakers of languages other than English or Spanish were less likely to have a telemedicine visit than were people whose primary language was English (OR 0.34 [95% CI 0.18 to 0.65]; p = 0.001), and that patients insured through Medicaid were less likely to be seen via telemedicine than were patients who were privately insured (OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.69 to 0.98]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Despite initial promises that telemedicine would help to bridge gaps in healthcare, our results demonstrate disparities in orthopaedic telemedicine use based on race or ethnicity, language, and insurance type. The telemedicine group was slightly younger, which we do not believe undermines the findings. As healthcare moves toward increased telemedicine use, we suggest several approaches to ensure that patients of certain racial, ethnic, or language groups do not experience disparate barriers to care. These might include individual patient- or provider-level approaches like expanded telemedicine schedules to accommodate weekends and evenings, institutional investment in culturally conscious outreach materials such as advertisements on community transport systems, or government-level provisions such as reimbursement for telephone-only encounters. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.


Subject(s)
Health Services Accessibility , Healthcare Disparities/statistics & numerical data , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Orthopedic Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Female , Health Plan Implementation , Healthcare Disparities/ethnology , Humans , Insurance Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Language , Male , Medicaid , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Telemedicine/methods , United States
10.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab ; 106(2): e1060-e1061, 2021 01 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1484818
11.
Clin Orthop Relat Res ; 479(1): 47-56, 2021 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1483562

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has resulted in a rapid pivot toward telemedicine owing to closure of in-person elective clinics and sustained efforts at physical distancing worldwide. Throughout this period, there has been revived enthusiasm for delivering and receiving orthopaedic care remotely. Unfortunately, rapidly published editorials and commentaries during the pandemic have not adequately conveyed findings of published randomized trials on this topic. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials, we asked: (1) What are the levels of patient and surgeon satisfaction with the use of telemedicine as a tool for orthopaedic care delivery? (2) Are there differences in patient-reported outcomes between telemedicine visits and in-person visits? (3) What is the difference in time commitment between telemedicine and in-person visits? METHODS: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a systematic review with the primary objective to determine patient and surgeon satisfaction with telemedicine, and secondary objectives to determine differences in patient-reported outcomes and time commitment. We used combinations of search keywords and medical subject headings around the terms "telemedicine", "telehealth", and "virtual care" combined with "orthopaedic", "orthopaedic surgery" and "randomized." We searched three medical databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) in duplicate and performed manual searches to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the outcomes of telemedicine and in-person orthopaedic assessments. Trials that studied an intervention that was considered to be telemedicine (that is, any form of remote or virtual care including, but not limited to, video, telephone, or internet-based care), had a control group that comprised in-person assessments performed by orthopaedic surgeons, and were reports of Level I original evidence were included in this study. Studies evaluating physiotherapy or rehabilitation interventions were excluded. Data was extracted by two reviewers and quantitative and qualitive summaries of results were generated. Methodological quality of included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, which uniformly rated the trials at high risk of bias within the blinding categories (blinding of providers, patients, and outcome assessors). We screened 133 published articles; 12 articles (representing eight randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. There were 1008 patients randomized (511 to telemedicine groups and 497 to control groups). Subspecialties represented were hip and knee arthroplasty (two trials), upper extremity (two trials), pediatric trauma (one trial), adult trauma (one trial), and general orthopaedics (two trials). RESULTS: There was no difference in the odds of satisfaction between patients receiving telemedicine care and those receiving in-person care (pooled odds ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.40 to 1.99]; p = 0.79). There were also no differences in surgeon satisfaction (pooled OR 0.38 [95% CI 0.07 to 2.19]; p = 0.28) or among multiple patient-reported outcome measures that evaluated pain and function. Patients reported time savings, both when travel time was excluded (17 minutes shorter [95% CI 2 to 32]; p = 0.03) and when it was included (180 minutes shorter [95% CI 78 to 281]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Evidence from heterogeneous randomized studies demonstrates that the use of telemedicine for orthopaedic assessments does not result in identifiable differences in patient or surgeon satisfaction compared with in-person assessments. Importantly, the source studies in this review did not adequately capture or report safety endpoints, such as complications or missed diagnoses. Future studies must be adequately powered to detect these differences to ensure patient safety is not compromised with the use of telemedicine. Although telemedicine may lead to a similar patient experience, surgeons should maintain a low threshold for follow-up with in-person assessments whenever possible in the absence of further safety data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Job Satisfaction , Orthopedic Procedures , Orthopedics , Patient Satisfaction , Telemedicine , Humans
12.
Curr Treat Options Allergy ; 8(2): 88-96, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384749

ABSTRACT

Purpose of Review: Management of anaphylaxis during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic should consider local infection rates so as to not burden local ED at times of pandemic, while also protecting patients from infection risks and progression of anaphylaxis. In this review, we identify a treatment strategy for anaphylaxis that balances the risks versus benefits of ED versus home management in this unprecedented time. Recent Findings: Physicians and patients have had to adapt new approaches to medical care during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic due to restricted access to health care facilities. Telemedicine has substituted in-person visits, and such a drastic change in the patient care paradigm presents a need to revise the acute management of anaphylaxis. Summary: Physicians should utilize telemedicine during this time to engage in shared decision-making with patients and their families to devise an anaphylaxis plan of management that emphasizes home care when symptoms are mild with an exception for ED care if a patient has had severe, near-fatal anaphylaxis episodes in the past. Previous anaphylaxis recommendations should remain in place despite the pandemic, including prompt use of epinephrine when needed, avoidance of known allergens, training of patients and their caregivers, and carrying of epinephrine autoinjector devices at all times to remain prepared in the event of an anaphylaxis episode. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40521-021-00284-0.

14.
J Parkinsons Dis ; 11(s1): S11-S18, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1318376

ABSTRACT

Telemedicine programs are particularly suited to evaluating patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) and other movement disorders, primarily because much of the physical exam findings are visual. Telemedicine uses information and communication technologies to overcome geographical barriers and increase access to healthcare service. It is particularly beneficial for rural and underserved communities, groups that traditionally suffer from lack of access to healthcare. There is a growing evidence of the feasibility of telemedicine, cost and time savings, patients' and physicians' satisfaction, and its outcome and impact on patients' morbidity and quality of life. In addition, given the unusual current situation with the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has offered the opportunity to address the ongoing healthcare needs of patients with PD, to reduce in-person clinic visits, and human exposures (among healthcare workers and patients) to a range of infectious diseases including COVID-19. However, there are still several challenges to widespread implementation of telemedicine including the limited performance of parts of the neurological exam, limited technological savvy, fear of loss of a personal connection, or uneasiness about communicating sensitive information. On the other hand, while we are facing the new wave of COVID-19 pandemic, patients and clinicians are gaining increasing experience with telemedicine, facilitating equity of access to specialized multidisciplinary care for PD. This article summarizes and reviews the current state and future directions of telemedicine from a global perspective.


Subject(s)
Parkinson Disease/diagnosis , Parkinson Disease/therapy , Telemedicine , COVID-19/complications , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Pandemics
15.
JMIR Form Res ; 5(6): e26452, 2021 Jun 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1305602

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic created new challenges to delivering safe and effective health care while minimizing virus exposure among staff and patients without COVID-19. Health systems worldwide have moved quickly to implement telemedicine in diverse settings to reduce infection, but little is understood about how best to connect patients who are acutely ill with nearby clinical team members, even in the next room. OBJECTIVE: To inform these efforts, this paper aims to provide an early example of inpatient telemedicine implementation and its perceived acceptability and effectiveness. METHODS: Using purposive sampling, this study conducted 15 semistructured interviews with nurses (5/15, 33%), attending physicians (5/15, 33%), and resident physicians (5/15, 33%) on a single COVID-19 unit within Stanford Health Care to evaluate implementation outcomes and perceived effectiveness of inpatient telemedicine. Semistructured interview protocols and qualitative analysis were framed around the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework, and key themes were identified using a rapid analytic process and consensus approach. RESULTS: All clinical team members reported wide reach of inpatient telemedicine, with some use for almost all patients with COVID-19. Inpatient telemedicine was perceived to be effective in reducing COVID-19 exposure and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) without significantly compromising quality of care. Physician workflows remained relatively stable, as most standard clinical activities were conducted via telemedicine following the initial intake examination, though resident physicians reported reduced educational opportunities given limited opportunities to conduct physical exams. Nurse workflows required significant adaptations to cover nonnursing duties, such as food delivery and facilitating technology connections for patients and physicians alike. Perceived patient impact included consistent care quality, with some considerations around privacy. Reported challenges included patient-clinical team communication and personal connection with the patient, perceptions of patient isolation, ongoing technical challenges, and certain aspects of the physical exam. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical team members reported inpatient telemedicine encounters to be acceptable and effective in reducing COVID-19 exposure and PPE use. Nurses adapted their workflows more than physicians in order to implement the new technology and bore a higher burden of in-person care and technical support. Recommendations for improved inpatient telemedicine use include information technology support and training, increased technical functionality, and remote access for the clinical team.

16.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 73(8): 1153-1161, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1298444

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on community-based rheumatology care and the use of telehealth is unclear. We undertook this study to investigate the impact of the pandemic on rheumatology care delivery in a large community practice-based network. METHODS: Using a community practice-based rheumatologist network, we examined trends in in-person versus telehealth visits versus canceled visits in 3 time periods: pre-COVID-19, COVID-19 transition (6 weeks beginning March 23, 2020), and post-COVID-19 transition (May-August). In the transition period, we compared patients who received in-person care versus telehealth visits versus those who cancelled all visits. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with canceled or telehealth visits. RESULTS: Pre-COVID-19, there were 7,075 visits/week among 60,002 unique rheumatology patients cared for by ~300 providers practicing in 92 offices. This number decreased substantially (24.6% reduction) during the COVID-19 transition period for in-person visits but rebounded to pre-COVID-19 levels during the post-COVID-19 transition. There were almost no telehealth visits pre-COVID-19, but telehealth increased substantially during the COVID-19 transition (41.4% of all follow-up visits) and slightly decreased during the post-COVID-19 transition (27.7% of visits). Older age, female sex, Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity, lower socioeconomic status, and rural residence were associated with a greater likelihood of canceling visits. Most factors were also associated with a lower likelihood of having telehealth versus in-office visits. Patients living further from the rheumatologists' office were more likely to use telehealth. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 led to large disruptions in rheumatology care; these disruptions were only partially offset by increases in telehealth use and disproportionately affected racial/ethnic minorities and patients with lower socioeconomic status. During the COVID-19 era, telehealth continues to be an important part of rheumatology practice, but disparities in access to care exist for some vulnerable groups.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Community Health Services/trends , Office Visits/trends , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Rheumatology/trends , Telemedicine/trends , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care/trends , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged
17.
Wien Klin Wochenschr ; 133(17-18): 892-901, 2021 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1274847

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection has caused huge impacts on all of people's lives and health systems. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, China was the first country to impose lockdown. We aimed to study the influence of COVID-19 on the outpatient visits of rheumatic patients in a non-outbreak area of China. METHODS: We selected three provincial or ministerial hospitals in Jinan, and collected the outpatient appointments data in rheumatology and immunology departments during the Shandong Province first-level public health emergency response period from 25 January 2020 to 8 March 2020. RESULTS: In the early stage, the number of outpatient appointments in the rheumatology and immunology departments of the three provincial or ministerial hospitals were significantly reduced, and gradually restored in the late stage. It showed that in the face of major infectious diseases, strict quarantine measures with the cooperation of the public not only controls the epidemic in a short time, but also lifts the quarantine measures and opens general outpatient clinics in hospitals as soon as possible, thus minimizing the impact on other patients. INTERPRETATION: The impact on the western hospital was greater than that on the Chinese medicine hospital, and the impact on the back-up designated hospitals for COVID-19 was the greatest. Online appointment can reduce the risk of infection in outpatients, but not completely solve the follow-up problem of rheumatic patients. Telemedicine provides a new solution for both management of rheumatic patients and control of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Communicable Disease Control , Humans , Outpatients , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2
18.
HIV AIDS (Auckl) ; 13: 651-656, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1278252

ABSTRACT

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telemedicine has been highlighted, especially in specialties, such as the management of HIV. Recent data were reviewed between January 1, 2019 and March 20, 2021 by searching English language manuscripts for studies documenting clinical outcomes in HIV care and the patient experience. A PubMed, Google Scholar, and bibliography review based on the search terms "HIV," "telemedicine," and "telehealth" was conducted. Studies included in this analysis were comprised of adult patients living with HIV, receiving care for HIV via telemedicine with reported clinical outcomes or perceptions of using telemedicine in the management of their HIV care. Of the 179 studies identified, 12 met inclusion for this analysis. Only two studies provided data on clinical outcomes of HIV (virologic outcomes), one pre-pandemic and one during COVID-19. The study evaluating viral suppression during COVID-19 demonstrated lower rates of virologic suppression and lower rates of missed appointments when shelter-in-place orders were issued compared to before the start of the pandemic. The remaining studies focused on patient-related outcomes as they related to the usability and adoption of telehealth models. Many practices documented the benefits and limitations of telemedicine based on the rapid switch from traditional in-person clinics. Benefits included retention in care for patients who lived a far distance from clinic, privacy for patients not wanting to be seen attending an HIV clinic, and more flexibility in scheduling appointments. Some limitations included patients' access to technology, ability and willingness to use technology, and privacy of patients who are homeless and reside in a shelter where homelessness is 3 times greater in people living with HIV compared to the general population. Healthcare should be tailored to the individual patient by assessing their needs and limitations, particularly with patients who may be at risk for discontinuation of care, particularly in the homeless population. In addition, there are mixed data on factors such as age, sex, and race being limiting factors in willingness to use technology. From the studies reviewed, willingness to engage with technology did not differ by age, sex, or race but did differ by access and willingness to use technology. Greater limitations were access to appropriate devices for telemedicine and digital literacy. Although there have been difficulties with the switch to telemedicine in clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients have reported being satisfied with care and would be interested in continuing once the shelter-in-place order is lifted. Future studies should focus on the provision of HIV care using telemedicine beyond the pandemic and focus on ways to improve the telemedicine experience for the patient.

19.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg ; 74(11): 3073-3079, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1270578

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Ramifications of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the re-structuring of healthcare are widespread, including delivery of surgical services across all specialties, including plastic surgery. Re-deployment of personnel and cessation of elective services are commonplace. However, there is a continued need for both emergency and oncological surgery. A national review of practice was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, to assess impact on services, staffing and training. METHODS: Key aspects of current plastic surgery practice in the United Kingdom were examined in this cross-sectional study; operating capacity, location of theatre lists (national health service or outsourced private institutions (PIs)), differences across sub-specialties, change in anaesthesia practices, staffing, re-deployment, on-call provision and impact on training. RESULTS: Three-hundred and forty-four plastic surgeons in the United Kingdom provided practice data across 51 units. Theatre capacity and outpatient services were markedly reduced. Outsourcing of operating lists to PIs was widely utilised. Increased use of local anaesthetic hand procedures, the prioritisation of shorter operations with reduced microsurgery in both head and neck/lower limb and almost complete cessation of breast reconstruction were noted, together with marked regional variations. Re-deployment occurred at all staffing levels, whilst telemedicine played a critical role in both patient management and training. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has enforced unprecedented changes to surgical care delivery and training, as identified by examination of plastic surgery nationally in the United Kingdom. Novel means to support continued elective and emergency services, including oncology have been identified. Lessons learned will allow phased return of services and improved preparation for the future.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Reconstructive Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Operating Rooms/organization & administration , Personnel Staffing and Scheduling/organization & administration , Surgery, Plastic , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom
20.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(23): e26089, 2021 Jun 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1266221

ABSTRACT

RATIONALE: COVID-19 presentation is multifaceted and up to 44% of patients affected by COVID-19 experience musculoskeletal complaints, mostly in the form of diffuse aspecific arthromyalgias. Nevertheless, only a few cases of arthritis following SARS-CoV2 infection are reported. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 27-year-old man affected by nail psoriasis presented with monoarthritis 2 weeks after being diagnosed with COVID-19. DIAGNOSES: Diagnostic work-up and differential diagnosis were made difficult by patient isolation, absence of lab tests, and his visit via telemedicine, even though signs of first metacarpophalangeal joint involvement were clear. INTERVENTIONS: Due to the inefficacy of acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, the patient was prescribed oral steroids with a rapid benefit. OUTCOMES: The patient's response to oral steroid was prompt and maintained even after therapy tapering. Even so, a formal diagnosis was not possible due to a difficult diagnostic work-up and lack of a long-term follow-up. LESSONS: Like many other viral diseases, SARS-CoV2 can play as a causative agent or as a trigger for inflammatory arthritis development in predisposed individuals.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Reactive/virology , COVID-19/complications , Metacarpophalangeal Joint , Adult , Humans , Male
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL