Search

Background: The quantification of self-triage effectiveness, guided by mobile applications, in urgent direct-to-consumer telemedicine (TM) encounters requires further investigation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of referral guidance provided by a symptom-based self-management mobile application decision algorithm in the context of remote urgent care assessments. Methods: An observational retrospective single-center study was conducted from May 2022 to December 2023. The inclusion criteria encompassed individuals aged >18 years old, and those spontaneously seeking virtual emergency care through the EINSTEIN CONECTA application. Patients experiencing connectivity issues, preventing completion of the encounter, were excluded. The primary outcomes included the rate of patient concurrence with the algorithm's recommendation for seeking in-person emergency care and the referral rate to face-to-face assessment among cases evaluated through TM. The application's algorithm employs scientific evidence based on symptoms to recommend referrals to emergency departments (EDs). Results: Out of 88,834 patients connected to the TM Center, self-triage obviated the need for virtual physician assessment in 53,302 (60%) encounters. A total of 35,532 patients were remotely evaluated by 316 on-duty physicians, resulting in 1,125 ICD-coded diagnoses. Among these, 21,722 (61.1%) were initially advised by self-triage to visit the ED, with subsequent medical assessment leading to in-person referrals in 6,354 (29.3%) of the evaluations. Of the 13,810 patients recommended to continue with virtual care post-self-triage, 157 (1.1%) were referred for in-person assessment. Conclusions: Self-triage effectively reduced the need for physician encounters in approximately three-fifths of TM consultations. Despite being based on scientific evidence, symptom-based referral algorithms demonstrated high sensitivity but poor correlation with physician decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 doorto-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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To analyze telemedicine diagnostic accuracy in patients with respiratory infections during COVID-19 pandemic compared to face-to-face evaluation in the emergency department. Methods: Randomized, unicentric study between September 2020 and November 2020 in patients with any respiratory symptom (exclusion criteria: age >65 years, chronic heart or lung diseases, immunosuppressed). Patients were randomized 1:1 for brief telemedicine followed by face-toface consultation or direct face-to-face evaluation. The primary endpoint was the International Classification of Diseases code. The secondary analysis comprised length of stay, diagnostic test ordering, medical prescription, and proposed destination. Results: Ninety-eight patients were enrolled. The mean age was 36.3±9.7 years old, 57.1% were women, and 81.6% had diagnostic test ordered. Mean grouped by International Classification of Diseases code for upper respiratory tract infection, pharyngotonsillitis, and sinusitis showed no difference between study groups or secondary endpoints. The Telemedicine Group was representative of the population usually evaluated in this center. In the Telemedicine Group (n=48), 18.7% patients would be referred for evaluation at the emergency department. The distribution of diagnoses by telemedicine was 67.4% for upper respiratory tract infection, 2.3% for pharyngotonsillitis, and 0% for sinusitis, being statistically similar to the subsequent face-to-face assessment, respectively: 72.1%, 11.6% and 7% (Kappa 0.386 [95%CI: 0.112-0.66]; p=0.536). Telemedicine ordered COVID-19 molecular (RT-PCR) tests in 76.5% versus 79.4% in face-to-face evaluation (Kappa 0.715 [95%CI: 0.413-1]; p>0.999). Conclusion: Diagnostic telemedicine consultation of low-risk patients with acute respiratory symptoms is not inferior to face-to-face evaluation at emergency department. Telemedicine is to be reinforced in the health care system as a strategy for the initial assessment of acute patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]