Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33872187›Full record

Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2021

Evaluation of an Intrahospital Telemedicine Program for Patients Admitted With COVID-19: Mixed Methods Study.

Sean Legler, Matthew Diehl, Brian Hilliard, Andrew Olson, Rebecca Markowitz, Christopher Tignanelli, Genevieve B Melton, Alain Broccard, Jonathan Kirsch, Michael Usher

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Inequity in Access and Delivery of Virtual Care Interventions: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sean LeglerDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6195-7135
Matthew DiehlDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7130-8019
Brian HilliardDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4901-6594
Andrew OlsonDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7226-5783
Rebecca MarkowitzDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-9607-0625
Christopher TignanelliDepartment of Surgery, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3134-0924
Genevieve B MeltonDepartment of Surgery, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5193-1663
Alain BroccardDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6928-1037
Jonathan KirschDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0185-8001
Michael UsherDivision of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0205-987X
University of Minnesota Medical Center · US

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
Institutional Career Development CoreKL2TR002492 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI INGBAR, DAVID H · 2018 to 2022
$6.3M
Minnesota Learning Health System Mentored Career Development Program (MN-LHS)K12HS026379 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BEEBE, TIMOTHY, LINZER, MARK · 2018 to 2022
$2.9M
Health Information Exchange Utilization and Inter-hospital Transfer OutcomesR01HS026732 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI USHER, MICHAEL G. · 2019 to 2022
$1.3M
AHRQ HHS K12 HS026379AHRQ HHS R01 HS026732NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR002492NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe increasing incidence of COVID-19 infection has challenged health care systems to increase capacity while conserving personal protective equipment (PPE) supplies and minimizing nosocomial spread. Telemedicine shows promise to address these challenges but lacks comprehensive evaluation in the inpatient environment.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to evaluate an intrahospital telemedicine program (virtual care), along with its impact on exposure risk and communication.

methodsWe conducted a natural experiment of virtual care on patients admitted for COVID-19. The primary exposure variable was documented use of virtual care. Patient characteristics, PPE use rates, and their association with virtual care use were assessed. In parallel, we conducted surveys with patients and clinicians to capture satisfaction with virtual care along the domains of communication, medical treatment, and exposure risk.

resultsOf 137 total patients in our primary analysis, 43 patients used virtual care. In total, there were 82 inpatient days of use and 401 inpatient days without use. Hospital utilization and illness severity were similar in patients who opted in versus opted out. Virtual care was associated with a significant reduction in PPE use and physical exam rate. Surveys of 41 patients and clinicians showed high rates of recommendation for further use, and subjective improvements in communication. However, providers and patients expressed limitations in usability, medical assessment, and empathetic communication.

conclusionsIn this pilot natural experiment, only a subset of patients used inpatient virtual care. When used, virtual care was associated with reductions in PPE use, reductions in exposure risk, and patient and provider satisfaction.

Indexed as

HospitalizationInpatientsAgedCommunicationCOVID-19FemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansMalePersonal Protective EquipmentSARS-CoV-2TelemedicinecommunicationCOVID-19evaluationexposurehospitalhospital medicineimpactmixed methodsrisktelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID33872187
PMCPMC8086788
OpenAlexW3154380881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.