INTRODUCTION: Many veterans live in rural areas distant from Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) and receive primary medical care from community-based outpatient clinics (CBOCs). These veterans often must travel great distances to the nearest VAMC for neuropsychological evaluations, resulting in poor access to care, travel reimbursement costs, fee-basis evaluations of uncontrolled quality, and driving safety concerns. Return trips for feedback compound complications. Accordingly, we initiated a pilot trial of neuropsychological evaluation and feedback via telemedicine (i.e., clinical videoconferencing). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Participants were veterans referred for neuropsychological evaluation from a rural CBOC 115 miles from the regional VAMC. All veterans were given the choice to undergo evaluation at the CBOC via telemedicine or in-person at the VAMC. Telemedicine equipment allowed presentation of digitized material with simultaneous patient observation. Testing materials were organized in numbered folders and given to veterans by CBOC clerks immediately prior to evaluation. Clerks returned completed materials via facsimile. RESULTS: Fifteen veterans from the rural CBOC were seen for neuropsychological evaluation. Eight chose telemedicine evaluation. Groups based on evaluation modality appeared similar on demographics, referral basis, resulting neuropsychiatric diagnoses, and follow-through on recommendations. No significant technical or clinical difficulties were encountered, and veterans reported satisfaction with telemedicine. All veterans requested feedback via telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: Neuropsychological evaluation via telemedicine is feasible and appears comparable to in-person evaluation. Experiences are encouraging and consistent with the broader literature on the acceptance of and satisfaction with clinical videoconferencing. Future studies will assess possible psychometric issues in clinical populations.
INTRODUCTION: Many veterans live in rural areas distant from Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) and receive primary medical care from community-based outpatient clinics (CBOCs). These veterans often must travel great distances to the nearest VAMC for neuropsychological evaluations, resulting in poor access to care, travel reimbursement costs, fee-basis evaluations of uncontrolled quality, and driving safety concerns. Return trips for feedback compound complications. Accordingly, we initiated a pilot trial of neuropsychological evaluation and feedback via telemedicine (i.e., clinical videoconferencing). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Participants were veterans referred for neuropsychological evaluation from a rural CBOC 115 miles from the regional VAMC. All veterans were given the choice to undergo evaluation at the CBOC via telemedicine or in-person at the VAMC. Telemedicine equipment allowed presentation of digitized material with simultaneous patient observation. Testing materials were organized in numbered folders and given to veterans by CBOC clerks immediately prior to evaluation. Clerks returned completed materials via facsimile. RESULTS: Fifteen veterans from the rural CBOC were seen for neuropsychological evaluation. Eight chose telemedicine evaluation. Groups based on evaluation modality appeared similar on demographics, referral basis, resulting neuropsychiatric diagnoses, and follow-through on recommendations. No significant technical or clinical difficulties were encountered, and veterans reported satisfaction with telemedicine. All veterans requested feedback via telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: Neuropsychological evaluation via telemedicine is feasible and appears comparable to in-person evaluation. Experiences are encouraging and consistent with the broader literature on the acceptance of and satisfaction with clinical videoconferencing. Future studies will assess possible psychometric issues in clinical populations.
Authors: Jeanine M Galusha-Glasscock; Daniel K Horton; Myron F Weiner; C Munro Cullum Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Timothy W Brearly; Robert D Shura; Sarah L Martindale; Rory A Lazowski; David D Luxton; Brian V Shenal; Jared A Rowland Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2017-06-16 Impact factor: 7.444
Authors: Nicole Rodriguez; Jonathan M Fawcett; Joshua A Rash; Renee Lester; Erin Powell; Connor D MacMillan; Sheila N Garland Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2021-01-16 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Angélique Aa Gruters; Inez Hgb Ramakers; Frans Rj Verhey; Roy Pc Kessels; Marjolein E de Vugt Journal: Neuropsychol Rev Date: 2021-04-20 Impact factor: 6.940