Guideline-Based Telemedicine Assessment of Orthopedic Low-Risk Conditions by General Practitioners is Not Inferior to that of Face-to-Face Consultations with Specialists in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Trial.

Background: There is a lack of randomized controlled trials focusing on orthopedic telemedicine (TM). The objective of this research was to compare the diagnostic accuracy and pattern of TM consultations of low-risk orthopedic patients performed by general practitioners (GPs) with those of face-to-face evaluations by orthopedists at an emergency department (ED). Methods: This randomized, single-center study was conducted between October 2021 and November 2022 on patients at an ED. Inclusion criteria were age >18 years, low back pain, extremity contusion, ankle sprain, or neck pain. Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 for TM consultations by generalist physicians with subsequent face-to-face orthopedic evaluations (TM-ED group) or face-to-face evaluations by orthopedic physicians (ED group). Primary outcomes were syndromic diagnosis, physical examination, and tests ordered. Secondary analysis included a satisfaction survey. Results: A total of 99 patients were enrolled; mean age was 41 ± 10.1 years, and 62.6% were female. The most common conditions were foot contusion (28.3%), ankle sprain (27.3%), hand contusion (19.2%), low back pain (19.2%), and neck pain (6.1%). Syndromic diagnosis showed no difference between groups (p = 0.231). In the TM-ED group (n = 51), self-examination demonstrated moderate to good agreement with face-to-face evaluations in several areas. Both groups showed similar tests practices. Patient satisfaction was higher in the TM-ED group across multiple measures. Conclusion: TM consultations for low-risk orthopedic patients by GPs are not inferior to face-to-face specialist evaluations at the ED. Virtual assessments are associated with higher patient satisfaction. Clinical Trial Identifier: NCT04981002.

The rise of Telecardiology in developing countries.

Telecardiology, the remote diagnosis and treatment of cardiac conditions, is experiencing a significant increase in developing nations. This article explores the driving forces behind this trend and its implications. Limited access to healthcare facilities, especially in rural, isolated, and underdeveloped regions, has propelled the adoption of telecardiology as a cost-effective solution to bridge the gap in cardiac care provision. Technological advancements, such as portable diagnostic devices and improvements in telecommunication infrastructure, have facilitated the expansion of telecardiology services. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the acceptance and deployment of telehealth solutions worldwide. Nevertheless, challenges persist, including regulatory hurdles, data privacy concerns, and disparities in digital literacy. Despite these obstacles, the rise of telecardiology in developing countries presents a promising opportunity to enhance access to cardiac care and improve health outcomes among underserved populations.

Multidrug stewardship and adherence to guidelines in >200,000 direct-to-consumer Telemedicine encounters.

OBJECTIVE: The quality of care and safety for Telemedicine-discharged patients with suspected respiratory infections are closely related to low rates of prescriptions of unjustified and high-risk medications. This retrospective study aimed to assess adherence to the current COVID-19 guidelines in direct-to-consumer telemedicine encounters at a large center using multidrug stewardship protocols. METHODS: A quarterly electronic survey utilizing medical records of individual physician care assessed various quality indicators. Physicians received ongoing adaptive feedback based on personal metrics, with Telemedicine Center recommendations derived from the 2020 Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines. The study included all consecutive adults with new respiratory symptoms in the last 14 days who sought spontaneous Telemedicine consultations between March 2020 and August 2021. This study analyzed patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and other airway infections. RESULTS: Of the 221,128 evaluated patients, 42,042 (19%) had confirmed COVID-19; 104,021 (47%) were suspected to have COVID-19; and, 75,065 (33%) had other diagnoses. Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 had a mean (+DP) age of 35±12 years. A total of 125,107 (85.65%) patients were managed at home, 2,552 (1.74%) were referred for non-urgent in-office reassessment, and 17,185 (11.7%) were referred to the emergency department for whom there was no further treatment recommendation. The antibiotic rate in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases was 0.46%/0.65% and that for non-evidence-based prescriptions was 0.01%/0.005%. CONCLUSION: Guideline training and Telemedicine consultation feedback may lead to lower antibiotic and antimicrobial prescriptions in suspected and confirmed COVID-19 cases. Multidrug stewardship protocols may improve guideline adherence and reinforce the quality of care and safety in Telemedicine encounters.

In-hospital stroke protocol outcomes before and after the implementation of neurological assessments by telemedicine: an observational case-control study.

Purpose: Stroke is the second leading cause of global adult mortality and the primary cause of disability. A rapid assessment by a neurologist for general and reperfusion treatments in ischemic strokes is linked to decreased mortality and disability. Telestroke assessment is a strategy that allows for neurological consultations with experienced professionals, even in remote emergency contexts. No randomized studies have compared face-to-face neurological care outcomes with telestroke care. Whether neurologists in an institution achieve better results remotely than in person is also unknown. This study aimed to compare mortality and other outcomes commonly measured in stroke protocols for stroke patients assessed by a neurologist via face-to-face evaluations and telestroke assessment. Methods: Observational single-center retrospective study from August/2009 to February/2022, enrolling 2,689 patients with ischemic stroke, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and intracerebral hemorrhage. Group 1 (G1) comprised 2,437 patients with in-person neurological assessments, and Telemedicine Group 2 (G2) included 252 patients. Results: The in-person group had higher admission NIHSS scores (G1, 3 (0; 36) vs. G2, 2 (0; 26), p < 0.001). The door-to-groin puncture time was lower in the in-person group than in the telestroke group (G1, 103 (42; 310) vs. G2, 151 (109; 340), p < 0.001). The telestroke group showed superior metrics for door-to-imaging time, symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation rate in ischemic stroke patients treated with intravenous thrombolysis, hospital stay duration, higher rates of intravenous thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy, and lower mortality. Symptomatic hemorrhagic transformation rate was smaller in the group evaluated via telestroke (G1, 5.1% vs. G2, 1.1%, p = 0.016). Intravenous thrombolysis and mechanical thrombectomy rates were significantly higher in telestroke group: (G1, 8.6% vs. G2, 18.2%, p < 0.001 and G1, 5.1% vs. G2, 10.4%, p = 0.002, respectively). Mortality was lower in the telestroke group than in the in-person group (G1, 11.1% vs. G2, 6.7%, p = 0.001). The percentage of patients with an mRS score of 0-2 at discharge was similar in both groups when adjusting for NIHSS score and age. Conclusion: The same neurological emergency team may assess stroke patients in-person or by telemedicine, with excellent outcome metrics. This study reaffirms telestroke as a safe tool in acute stroke care.

Telemedicine and patients with heart failure: evidence and unresolved issues.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is the leading cause of cardiac-related hospitalizations. Limited access to reevaluations and outpatient appointments restricts the application of modern therapies. Telemedicine has become an essential resource in the healthcare system because of its countless benefits, such as higher and more frequent appointments and faster titration of medications. This narrative review aimed to demonstrate the evidence and unresolved issues related to the use of telemedicine in patients with heart failure. No studies have examined heart failure prevention; however, several studies have addressed the prevention of decompensation with positive results. Telemedicine can be used to evaluate all patients with heart failure, and many telemedicine platforms are available. Several strategies, including both noninvasive (phone calls, weight measurement, and virtual visits) and invasive (implantable pulmonary artery catheters) strategies can be implemented. Given these benefits, telemedicine is highly desirable, particularly for vulnerable groups. Although some questions remain unanswered, the development of new technologies can complement remote visits and improve patient care.

Is it possible to estimate the number of patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units and general wards using clinical and telemedicine data?

BACKGROUND: Gabaldi et al. utilized telemedicine data, web search trends, hospitalized patient characteristics, and resource usage data to estimate bed occupancy during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results showcase the potential of data-driven strategies to enhance resource allocation decisions for an effective pandemic response. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate predictive models to estimate the number of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the intensive care units and general wards of a private not-for-profit hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. METHODS: Two main models were developed. The first model calculated hospital occupation as the difference between predicted COVID-19 patient admissions, transfers between departments, and discharges, estimating admissions based on their weekly moving averages, segmented by general wards and intensive care units. Patient discharge predictions were based on a length of stay predictive model, assessing the clinical characteristics of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, including age group and usage of mechanical ventilation devices. The second model estimated hospital occupation based on the correlation with the number of telemedicine visits by patients diagnosed with COVID-19, utilizing correlational analysis to define the lag that maximized the correlation between the studied series. Both models were monitored for 365 days, from May 20th, 2021, to May 20th, 2022. RESULTS: The first model predicted the number of hospitalized patients by department within an interval of up to 14 days. The second model estimated the total number of hospitalized patients for the following 8 days, considering calls attended by Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein's telemedicine department. Considering the average daily predicted values for the intensive care unit and general ward across a forecast horizon of 8 days, as limited by the second model, the first and second models obtained R² values of 0.900 and 0.996, respectively and mean absolute errors of 8.885 and 2.524 beds, respectively. The performances of both models were monitored using the mean error, mean absolute error, and root mean squared error as a function of the forecast horizon in days. CONCLUSION: The model based on telemedicine use was the most accurate in the current analysis and was used to estimate COVID-19 hospital occupancy 8 days in advance, validating predictions of this nature in similar clinical contexts. The results encourage the expansion of this method to other pathologies, aiming to guarantee the standards of hospital care and conscious consumption of resources. BACKGROUND: Developed models to forecast bed occupancy for up to 14 days and monitored errors for 365 days. BACKGROUND: Telemedicine calls from COVID-19 patients correlated with the number of patients hospitalized in the next 8 days.

Adherence to Emergency Department Referral Criteria in a Direct-to-Consumer Telemedicine Center.

Background: The safety of direct-to-consumer telemedicine (TM) is closely related to red flag detection and correct referrals. The adherence to referral criteria from current guidelines is not well quantified. Objective: To analyze the emergency department (ED) referral rate and adherence to referral guidelines in TM encounters of acutely ill patients calling a center that adopts stewardship protocols. Methods: This is a retrospective observational unicentric study, between March 2020 and March 2022, with patients who spontaneously sought direct-to-consumer urgent virtual medical assistance. A video-based teleconsultation was provided immediately after connection. Physicians managed situations according to their clinical judgment. Current guidelines, containing specific guidance for referral if red flags were identified, were available for consultation. Physicians' semiannual performance feedback was carried out. We analyzed the patterns for referral to immediate face-to-face medical evaluation and the agreement degree with the institutional guidelines. Results: A total of 232,197 patients were available, and 14,051 (6.05%) patients were referred to ED. A total of 8,829 (68.4%) referrals were based in specific guidelines according to the International Classification of Diseases hypothesis, and 8,708 (98.6%) were justified according to guidelines. Diarrhea had the highest guidelines' adherence to referral (97.6%), followed by COVID-19 (90%), headache (84.2%), and conjunctivitis (78.8%). Policies did not support 5,222 (31.6%) referrals, though 5,100 (97.6%) of these were justified according to the doctor's clinical judgment. Conclusion: TM doctors' assessment of acutely ill patients has high rates of adherence to guidelines regarding referral. Stewardship protocol adoption provides high rates of red flag description, even in the referral of nonpolicy diseases.

Is it possible to estimate the number of patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units and general wards using clinical and telemedicine data?

ABSTRACT Objective: To develop and validate predictive models to estimate the number of COVID-19 patients hospitalized in the intensive care units and general wards of a private not-for-profit hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Methods: Two main models were developed. The first model calculated hospital occupation as the difference between predicted COVID-19 patient admissions, transfers between departments, and discharges, estimating admissions based on their weekly moving averages, segmented by general wards and intensive care units. Patient discharge predictions were based on a length of stay predictive model, assessing the clinical characteristics of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, including age group and usage of mechanical ventilation devices. The second model estimated hospital occupation based on the correlation with the number of telemedicine visits by patients diagnosed with COVID-19, utilizing correlational analysis to define the lag that maximized the correlation between the studied series. Both models were monitored for 365 days, from May 20th, 2021, to May 20th, 2022. Results: The first model predicted the number of hospitalized patients by department within an interval of up to 14 days. The second model estimated the total number of hospitalized patients for the following 8 days, considering calls attended by Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein's telemedicine department. Considering the average daily predicted values for the intensive care unit and general ward across a forecast horizon of 8 days, as limited by the second model, the first and second models obtained R² values of 0.900 and 0.996, respectively and mean absolute errors of 8.885 and 2.524 beds, respectively. The performances of both models were monitored using the mean error, mean absolute error, and root mean squared error as a function of the forecast horizon in days. Conclusion: The model based on telemedicine use was the most accurate in the current analysis and was used to estimate COVID-19 hospital occupancy 8 days in advance, validating predictions of this nature in similar clinical contexts. The results encourage the expansion of this method to other pathologies, aiming to guarantee the standards of hospital care and conscious consumption of resources.

Telemedicine and patients with heart failure: evidence and unresolved issues

ABSTRACT Heart failure is the leading cause of cardiac-related hospitalizations. Limited access to reevaluations and outpatient appointments restricts the application of modern therapies. Telemedicine has become an essential resource in the healthcare system because of its countless benefits, such as higher and more frequent appointments and faster titration of medications. This narrative review aimed to demonstrate the evidence and unresolved issues related to the use of telemedicine in patients with heart failure. No studies have examined heart failure prevention; however, several studies have addressed the prevention of decompensation with positive results. Telemedicine can be used to evaluate all patients with heart failure, and many telemedicine platforms are available. Several strategies, including both noninvasive (phone calls, weight measurement, and virtual visits) and invasive (implantable pulmonary artery catheters) strategies can be implemented. Given these benefits, telemedicine is highly desirable, particularly for vulnerable groups. Although some questions remain unanswered, the development of new technologies can complement remote visits and improve patient care.

Multidrug stewardship and adherence to guidelines in >200,000 direct-to-consumer Telemedicine encounters

ABSTRACT Objective: The quality of care and safety for Telemedicine-discharged patients with suspected respiratory infections are closely related to low rates of prescriptions of unjustified and high-risk medications. This retrospective study aimed to assess adherence to the current COVID-19 guidelines in direct-to-consumer telemedicine encounters at a large center using multidrug stewardship protocols. Methods: A quarterly electronic survey utilizing medical records of individual physician care assessed various quality indicators. Physicians received ongoing adaptive feedback based on personal metrics, with Telemedicine Center recommendations derived from the 2020 Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines. The study included all consecutive adults with new respiratory symptoms in the last 14 days who sought spontaneous Telemedicine consultations between March 2020 and August 2021. This study analyzed patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and other airway infections. Results: Of the 221,128 evaluated patients, 42,042 (19%) had confirmed COVID-19; 104,021 (47%) were suspected to have COVID-19; and, 75,065 (33%) had other diagnoses. Patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 had a mean (+DP) age of 35±12 years. A total of 125,107 (85.65%) patients were managed at home, 2,552 (1.74%) were referred for non-urgent in-office reassessment, and 17,185 (11.7%) were referred to the emergency department for whom there was no further treatment recommendation. The antibiotic rate in confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases was 0.46%/0.65% and that for non-evidence-based prescriptions was 0.01%/0.005%. Conclusion: Guideline training and Telemedicine consultation feedback may lead to lower antibiotic and antimicrobial prescriptions in suspected and confirmed COVID-19 cases. Multidrug stewardship protocols may improve guideline adherence and reinforce the quality of care and safety in Telemedicine encounters.