Telemedizin in der Rheumatologie Telemedicine in rheumatology
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Krusche M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7557255 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionWith the COVID-19 pandemic, health care systems are facing challenges in delivering proper patient care. Children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis require specialized and comprehensive attention. In this context, telemedicine is an alternative that has the potential to improve access to healthcare in addition to cost savings. The objective of our study was to evaluate parents' willingness for telemedicine and factors helping to adopt this alternative in the era of COVID-19.MethodsWe undertook a cross-sectional study via structured phone interviews of parents' JIA patients as well as those with no established diagnoses. We evaluated their point of view and willingness to adhere to TM.ResultsThe study included 40 parents. The main reasons for favoring TM were avoiding hospitals during the pandemic (32.5%), time saving (27.5%) as well as avoiding school absenteeism (27.5%). The main reasons for preferring a live consultation were the fear of a possible discrepancy between physical and distant evaluation (47.5%) and the fear of the trivialization of the disease (38.5%). There was no association between preference for TM and a family history of COVID-19 (p = 0.704) as well as electronic devices afforded (p = 0.263). However, patients who lived away from hospital, not familiar with the concept of TM and with higher income adhered less to TM.ConclusionUnlike the literature data, our study showed the low prevalence of parents willing to accept TM as a model of care. This imply an urgent need for parent and patient education to promote TM especially in pediatric rheumatology.
| S-EPMC9797351 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7537960 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite all its promises, telemedicine is still not widely implemented in the care of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). The aim of this study is to investigate opportunities, barriers, acceptance, and preferences concerning telemedicine among RMD patients and professional stakeholders. From November 2017 to December 2019, a participatory, mixed-methods study was conducted, consisting of (1) expert interviews (n = 27) with RMD patients and professional stakeholders, (2) a national paper-based patient survey (n = 766), and (3) focus groups (n = 2) with patient representatives and rheumatologists. The qualitative findings indicate that patients equate personal contact with physical face-to-face contact, which could be reduced by implementing telemedicine, thus negatively influencing the patient-doctor relationship. Correspondingly "no personal contact with the doctor" is the main reason (64%) why 38% of the surveyed patients refuse to try telemedicine. Professional stakeholders expect telemedicine to contribute to the effective allocation of scarce resources in rheumatology care. The main barriers reported by stakeholders were the scarcity of time resources in RMD care, the absence of physical examinations, and organizational challenges associated with the implementation of telemedicine in RMD care. While the exact integration of telemedicine into routine care has yet to be found, the consequences on the patient-physician relationship must be permanently considered.
| S-EPMC8701397 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of telemedicine use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on rheumatology trainees.MethodsA voluntary, anonymous, web-based survey was administered in English, Spanish, or French from August 19 to October 5, 2020. Adult and pediatric rheumatology trainees were invited to participate via social media and email. Using multiple-choice questions and Likert scales, the survey assessed prior and current telemedicine use, impact on training, and supervision after COVID-19 prompted rapid telemedicine implementation.ResultsSurveys were received from 302 trainees from 33 countries, with 83% in adult rheumatology training programs. Reported telemedicine use increased from 13% before the pandemic to 82% during the pandemic. United States trainees predominantly used video visits, whereas outside the United States telemedicine was predominantly audio only. Most (65%) evaluated new patients using telemedicine. More respondents were comfortable using telemedicine for follow-up patients (69%) than for new patients (25%). Only 39% of respondents reported receiving telemedicine-focused training, including instruction on software, clinical skills, and billing, whereas more than half of United States trainees (59%) had training. Postconsultation verbal discussion was the most frequent form of supervision; 24% reported no supervision. Trainees found that telemedicine negatively impacted supervision (50%) and the quality of clinical teaching received (70%), with only 9% reporting a positive impact.ConclusionsDespite widespread uptake of telemedicine, a low proportion of trainees received telemedicine training, and many lacked comfort in evaluating patients, particularly new patients. Inadequate supervision and clinical teaching were areas of concern. If telemedicine remains in widespread use, ensuring appropriate trainee supervision and teaching should be prioritized.
| S-EPMC8652624 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim was to assess rheumatology clinicians' perceptions of telemedicine and their experiences before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional online survey and collected responses from rheumatology clinicians worldwide, between November 2020 and February 2021, regarding use and perceptions of telemedicine in rheumatology. We summarized data with descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis for free-text responses.ResultsThe survey was completed by 349 rheumatology clinicians from 49 countries; 59% were female and about two-thirds were in the 30-50 years age group. Academic affiliations were held by 55% of participants, and 44% were from North America. Before the pandemic, 24% of participants had experience with telemedicine, whereas about three-quarters used telemedicine for the first time during the pandemic. Overall, 56% thought they provided less adequate care with telemedicine. More than half of clinicians felt that telemedicine was adequate for evaluating crystalline arthritis, inflammatory arthritis and lupus flares. Telemedicine was felt to be inadequate for flares of myositis, vasculitis and scleroderma. Technical problems were reported in 29% of telemedicine encounters and were most commonly related to patient-encountered difficulties.ConclusionMost rheumatology clinicians used telemedicine for the first time during the pandemic. The quality of care provided was thought to be inferior to that provided in person for specific clinical situations. Additional efforts are needed to address barriers to effective telemedicine, such as patient-related technology issues, challenges with building rapport and performing a physical examination, and to define the appropriate scope of clinical scenarios conducive to telemedicine.
| S-EPMC9154733 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease-19 pandemic changed rheumatology practice with remote consultations being increasingly utilized where appropriate. We evaluated patient experiences with telephone consultations and report on patient attitudes toward current health care delivery and perspectives of telemedicine in a UK National Health Service rheumatology outpatient department. We analyzed 297 questionnaires from a postal survey conducted during the summer of 2020 after a telephone follow-up consultation. The mean age of respondents was 67 years and 68% were female. The 161 respondents (54%) reported it was their first telephone consultation and overall, 239 (84%) were satisfied with their health assessment. 60% would be happy to have future routine follow-up telephone consultations. Patients advised to shield shared similar satisfaction to the whole sample. However, with increasing age we identified a higher proportion were dissatisfied with telephone consultations and unlikely to have accessibility to video consultation or preferentially opt for this modality.
| S-EPMC8381414 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe Covid-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid global transition towards telemedicine; yet much remains unknown about telemedicine's acceptability and safety in rheumatology. To help address this gap and inform practice, this study investigated rheumatology patient and clinician experiences and views of telemedicine.MethodsSequential mixed methodology combined analysis of surveys and in-depth interviews. Between and within-group differences in views of telemedicine were examined for patients and clinicians using t-tests.ResultsSurveys (patients n = 1340, clinicians n = 111) and interviews (patients n = 31, clinicians n = 29) were completed between April 2021 and July 2021. The majority of patients were from the UK (96%) and had inflammatory arthritis (32%) or lupus (32%). Patients and clinicians rated telemedicine as worse than face-to-face consultations in almost all categories, although >60% found it more convenient. Building trusting medical relationships and assessment accuracy were great concerns (93% of clinicians and 86% of patients rated telemedicine as worse than face-to-face for assessment accuracy). Telemedicine was perceived to have increased misdiagnoses, inequalities and barriers to accessing care. Participants reported highly disparate telemedicine delivery and responsiveness from primary and secondary care. Although rheumatology clinicians highlighted the importance of a quick response to flaring patients, only 55% of patients were confident that their rheumatology department would respond within 48 hours.ConclusionFindings indicate a preference for face-to-face consultations. Some negative experiences may be due to the pandemic rather than telemedicine specifically, although the risk of greater diagnostic inaccuracies using telemedicine is unlikely to be fully resolved. Training, choice, careful patient selection, and further consultation with clinicians and patients is required to increase telemedicine's acceptability and safety.Trial registrationThis telemedicine study is part of a pre-registered longitudinal multi-stage trial, the LISTEN study (ISRCTN-14966097), with later Covid-related additions registered in March 2021, including a pre-registered statistical analysis plan.
| S-EPMC8689882 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability of virtual video-assisted visits, added to the tight control strategy for inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRDs), in identifying patients that need treatment adjustment.MethodsTightly followed-up adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis, and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) performed a video consultation during COVID19 lockdown and repeated the same rheumatology evaluations through a face-to-face visit within 2-weeks. Sensitivity and specificity of virtual visits for treatment decisions (categorized as unchanged, adjusted/escalate, tapered/discontinued, need for further examinations), and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for virtually measured disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were calculated with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) using face-to-face visits as the reference method.ResultsIn 89 out of 106 (84.0%) patients, face-to-face visits confirmed the remotely delivered treatment decision. Video-visiting showed excellent sensitivity (94.1% with 95%CI 71.3%-99.9%) and specificity (96.7%; 95%CI 90.8% to 99.3%) in identifying the need for treatment adjustment due to inadequate disease control. The major driver for the low sensitivity of virtual video consultation (55.6%; 95%CI 21.2%-86.3%) in identifying the need for treatment tapering was SLE diagnosis (OR 10.0; 95%CI 3.1-32.3; p < 0.001), mostly because of discordance with face-to-face consultation in glucocorticoid tapering. Remotely evaluated PROs showed high reliability (ICC range 0.80 to 0.95) whilst disease activity measures had less consistent data (ICC range 0.50 to 0.95), especially those requiring more extensive physical examination such as in SLE and PsA.ConclusionVideo-visiting proved high reliability in identifying the need for treatment adjustment and might support the IRDs standard tight-control strategy.
| S-EPMC8436393 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTelemedicine was implemented in outpatient care during the lockdown between March and May 2020. The aim of the study was to assess patients from a private practice and the university outpatient department with respect to patient satisfaction with telemedicine, COVID-19 worries and vaccination behavior and to compare the teleconsultation by a medical assistant for rheumatology (RFA) and a physician.MethodsPatients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatric arthropathy or spondylarthritis without treatment modifications since the previous presentation were offered a telemedical replacement appointment within the framework of this study in the case of appointment cancellation by the treating center. Participants were randomized to a telemedicine appointment by a physician or an RFA (RFA university only). The patient history was carried out by telephone and standardized using a questionnaire. The disease activity was determined using the modified clinical disease activity score (CDAI) and the BASDAI. Subsequently, all patients received a pseudonymized evaluation questionnaire.ResultsIn total 112/116 (96%) patients participated. Of these 88/112 (79%) returned the questionnaire. The RFAs conducted 19/112 (17%) of the telephone calls. The treatment was modified in 19/112 (17%) patients. Concerns about contracting COVID-19 correlated with high disease activity (p = 0.031) including the presence of painful joints (p = 0.001) and high pain levels (VAS ≥7, p = 0.009). These patients would have also cancelled their appointment themselves (p = 0.015). Patient satisfaction with the consultation was good (mean 4.3/5.0 modified FAPI) independent of the institution, the duration of the consultation and the consultation partner. Patients with a high pain intensity were the least satisfied (p = 0.036). Only 42/100 (38.2%) of the patients had been vaccinated against pneumococci and 59/100 (53.6%) against influenza.ConclusionTelemedical care within the framework of a telephone consultation is well-suited for selected patients. With respect to patient satisfaction the delegation of a telemedical consultation to an RFA is possible. There is a need for improvement with respect to the vaccination behavior.
| S-EPMC8111653 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe United States pediatric rheumatology workforce is committed to a mission of providing children access to pediatric rheumatology care. With a limited number and distribution of pediatric rheumatologists, telemedicine has been proposed as one way to meet this mission, yet the adoption of this modality has been slower than expected. The purpose of this study was to explore the parent perspective on barriers to accessing pediatric rheumatology care and to explore the acceptability of telemedicine and other alternative care models.MethodsOver a period of six weeks, all new and return English-speaking parents/guardians of patients visiting a single center were offered an opportunity to complete a survey which assessed barriers to care and interest in alternative models of care. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics.ResultsSurvey response rate was 72% (159/221). Twenty-eight percent (45/159) traveled more than three hours to the pediatric rheumatology clinic, and 43% (65/152) reported travel as inconvenient. An overwhelming majority of respondents (95%, 144/152) reported a preference for in-person visits over the option of telemedicine. This preference was similar regardless of whether respondents reported travel to the clinic as inconvenient vs convenient (inconvenient 92%, 60/65; convenient 97%, 84/87; p = 0.2881) and despite those reporting travel as inconvenient also reporting greater difficulty with several barriers to care. Those familiar with telemedicine were more likely to report a preference for telemedicine over in-person visits (27%, 3/11 vs 3%, 4/140; p = 0.0087). The option of an outreach clinic was acceptable to a majority (63%, 97/154); however, adult rheumatology and shared-care options were less acceptable (22%, 35/156 and 34%, 53/156 respectively).ConclusionAmong survey respondents, in-person visits were preferred over the option of telemedicine, even when travel was noted to be inconvenient. Telemedicine familiarity increased its acceptability. Outreach clinics were acceptable to a majority. Ultimately, the parent perspective can shape acceptable ways to address barriers and provide accessible care.
| S-EPMC5504634 | biostudies-literature