Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34389525›Full record

ArticleWorld neurosurgery2021

A Multicenter Evaluation of the Feasibility, Patient/Provider Satisfaction, and Value of Virtual Spine Consultation During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Sandra Hobson, Ilyas S Aleem, Miranda J Bice, Bilal B Butt, Mohamad Bydon, Benjamin D Elder, Donald R Fredericks, Melvin D Helgeson, Rakesh D Patel, Arjun Sebastian and 5 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in World neurosurgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Patient satisfaction with virtual evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of CRPS.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2022
    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

15 authors.

Sandra HobsonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Ilyas S AleemDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Miranda J BiceDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, UW Health University Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Bilal B ButtDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Mohamad BydonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Benjamin D ElderDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Donald R FredericksDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Melvin D HelgesonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Rakesh D PatelDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Arjun SebastianDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Scott C WagnerDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Seth K WilliamsDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, UW Health University Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Ashley E XiongDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Paul A AndersonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, UW Health University Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Brett FreedmanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. Electronic address: freedman.brett@mayo.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the feasibility, patient/provider satisfaction, and perceived value of telehealth spine consultation after rapid conversion from traditional in-office visits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

methodsData were obtained for patients undergoing telehealth visits with spine surgeons in the first 3 weeks after government restriction of elective surgical care at 4 sites (March 23, 2020, to April 17, 2020). Demographic factors, technique-specific elements of the telehealth experience, provider confidence in diagnostic and therapeutic assessment, patient/surgeon satisfaction, and perceived value were collected.

resultsA total of 128 unique visits were analyzed. New (74 [58%]), preoperative (26 [20%]), and postoperative (28 [22%]) patients were assessed. A total of 116 (91%) visits had successful connection on the first attempt. Surgeons felt very confident 101 times (79%) when assessing diagnosis and 107 times (84%) when assessing treatment plan. The mean and median patient satisfaction was 89% and 94%, respectively. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher for video over audio-only visits (P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction was not significantly different with patient age, location of chief complaint (cervical or thoracolumbar), or visit type (new, preoperative, or postoperative). Providers reported that 76% of the time they would choose to perform the visit again in telehealth format. Sixty percent of patients valued the visit cost as the same or slightly less than an in-office consultation.

conclusionsThis is the first study to demonstrate the feasibility and high patient/provider satisfaction of virtual spine surgical consultation, and appropriate reimbursement and balanced regulation for spine telehealth care is essential to continue this existing work.

Indexed as

COVID-19Feasibility StudiesNeurosurgeonsPandemicsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPhysical ExaminationCOVID-19Patient satisfactionSpine surgeryTelehealthVirtual consultation

Identifiers

PMID34389525
PMCPMC8490082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.