Elyne N Kahn1, Frank La Marca2, Catherine A Mazzola3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. Electronic address: elyne.kahn@gmail.com. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 3. New Jersey Pediatric Neuroscience Institute, Morristown, New Jersey, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has seen substantial growth in the past 20 years, related to technologic advancements and evolving reimbursement policies. The risks and opportunities of neurosurgical telemedicine are nuanced. METHODS: We reviewed general and peer-reviewed literature as it relates to telemedicine and neurosurgery, with particular attention to best practices, relevant state and federal policy conditions, economic evaluations, and prospective clinical studies. RESULTS: Despite technologic development, growing interest, and increasing reimbursement opportunities, telemedicine's utilization remains limited because of concerns regarding an apparent lack of need for telemedicine services, lack of widespread reimbursement, lack of interstate licensure reciprocity, lack of universal access to necessary technology, concerns about maintaining patient confidentiality, and concerns and limited precedent regarding liability issues. The Veterans Health Administration, a component of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, represents a setting in which these concerns can be largely obviated and is a model for telemedicine best practices. Results from the VA demonstrate substantial cost savings and patient satisfaction with remote care for chronic neurologic conditions. Overall, the economic and clinical benefits of telemedicine will likely come from 1) diminished travel times and lost work time for patients; 2) remote consultation of subspecialty experts, such as neurosurgeons; and 3) remote consultation to assist with triage and care in time-sensitive scenarios, including acute stroke care and "teletrauma." CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine is effective in many health care scenarios and will become more relevant to neurosurgical patient care. We favor proceeding with legislation to reduce barriers to telemedicine's growth.
BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has seen substantial growth in the past 20 years, related to technologic advancements and evolving reimbursement policies. The risks and opportunities of neurosurgical telemedicine are nuanced. METHODS: We reviewed general and peer-reviewed literature as it relates to telemedicine and neurosurgery, with particular attention to best practices, relevant state and federal policy conditions, economic evaluations, and prospective clinical studies. RESULTS: Despite technologic development, growing interest, and increasing reimbursement opportunities, telemedicine's utilization remains limited because of concerns regarding an apparent lack of need for telemedicine services, lack of widespread reimbursement, lack of interstate licensure reciprocity, lack of universal access to necessary technology, concerns about maintaining patient confidentiality, and concerns and limited precedent regarding liability issues. The Veterans Health Administration, a component of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, represents a setting in which these concerns can be largely obviated and is a model for telemedicine best practices. Results from the VA demonstrate substantial cost savings and patient satisfaction with remote care for chronic neurologic conditions. Overall, the economic and clinical benefits of telemedicine will likely come from 1) diminished travel times and lost work time for patients; 2) remote consultation of subspecialty experts, such as neurosurgeons; and 3) remote consultation to assist with triage and care in time-sensitive scenarios, including acute stroke care and "teletrauma." CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine is effective in many health care scenarios and will become more relevant to neurosurgical patient care. We favor proceeding with legislation to reduce barriers to telemedicine's growth.
Authors: Fraser Henderson; Jacob Lepard; Jason Seibly; William Rambo; Scott Boswell; William R Copeland Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Gregory Glauser; Connor Wathen; Stephen P Miranda; Rachel Blue; Ryan Dimentberg; William C Welch; John Y K Lee; Neil R Malhotra Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2020-05-16 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Monica J Chau; Jorge E Quintero; Ashley Guiliani; Tripp Hines; Christopher Samaan; Katie Seybold; Matthew Stowe; Dean Hanlon; Greg A Gerhardt; Craig van Horne Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2021-06-12 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Alexander F Haddad; John F Burke; Praveen V Mummaneni; Andrew K Chan; Michael M Safaee; John J Knightly; Rory R Mayer; Brenton H Pennicooke; Anthony M Digiorgio; Philip R Weinstein; Aaron J Clark; Dean Chou; Sanjay S Dhall Journal: Neurospine Date: 2021-06-30