OBJECTIVE: To evaluate diagnostic concordance of a synchronous telemedicine otolaryngology clinic with use of currently available technology. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective. METHODS: Patients in a rural otolaryngology clinic were enrolled in a pilot telemedicine clinic. To assess system fidelity, an on-site and remote (consulting) otolaryngologist conducted simultaneous patient evaluations using streaming telecommunication technology for all aspects of the clinical encounter, including high-definition examination and endoscopic images. Both physicians and patients were blinded and diagnoses recorded. Post-encounter physician surveys and an original patient-centered TeleENT Satisfaction Questionnaire (TESQ) were used to assess overall satisfaction. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled consecutively. Visual technology was found acceptable in all cases, and audio technology was acceptable in 20 of 21 encounters. Patient satisfaction was 96%, and patients felt comfortable using a telemedicine system in the future. Encounters were not significantly longer than traditional encounters. Physician diagnostic agreement was found in 95% of cases, and the consulting physician indicated that all encounters provided sufficient history, examination, and high-quality images to generate an accurate diagnosis, order additional workup, and/or make an appropriate referral. CONCLUSION: A synchronous otolaryngology telemedicine clinic is comparable to a standard clinic in terms of diagnostic concordance and patient satisfaction when using streaming technology and high-definition images. Using telemedical technology may be a viable way to increase otolaryngology access in remote or underserved areas. With system validity now established, future studies will assess the feasibility of using trained on-site physician extenders (nurse practitioners or physician assistants) to conduct in-person patient encounters with remote otolaryngologist support. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c. Laryngoscope, 128:1068-1074, 2018.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate diagnostic concordance of a synchronous telemedicine otolaryngology clinic with use of currently available technology. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective. METHODS:Patients in a rural otolaryngology clinic were enrolled in a pilot telemedicine clinic. To assess system fidelity, an on-site and remote (consulting) otolaryngologist conducted simultaneous patient evaluations using streaming telecommunication technology for all aspects of the clinical encounter, including high-definition examination and endoscopic images. Both physicians and patients were blinded and diagnoses recorded. Post-encounter physician surveys and an original patient-centered TeleENT Satisfaction Questionnaire (TESQ) were used to assess overall satisfaction. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled consecutively. Visual technology was found acceptable in all cases, and audio technology was acceptable in 20 of 21 encounters. Patient satisfaction was 96%, and patients felt comfortable using a telemedicine system in the future. Encounters were not significantly longer than traditional encounters. Physician diagnostic agreement was found in 95% of cases, and the consulting physician indicated that all encounters provided sufficient history, examination, and high-quality images to generate an accurate diagnosis, order additional workup, and/or make an appropriate referral. CONCLUSION: A synchronous otolaryngology telemedicine clinic is comparable to a standard clinic in terms of diagnostic concordance and patient satisfaction when using streaming technology and high-definition images. Using telemedical technology may be a viable way to increase otolaryngology access in remote or underserved areas. With system validity now established, future studies will assess the feasibility of using trained on-site physician extenders (nurse practitioners or physician assistants) to conduct in-personpatient encounters with remote otolaryngologist support. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2c. Laryngoscope, 128:1068-1074, 2018.
Authors: Janet S Choi; Victoria Yin; Franklin Wu; Neel K Bhatt; Karla O'Dell; Michael Johns Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2021-08-24 Impact factor: 2.970
Authors: Hamidullah Binol; Muhammad Khalid Khan Niazi; Garth Essig; Jay Shah; Jameson K Mattingly; Michael S Harris; Charles Elmaraghy; Theodoros Teknos; Nazhat Taj-Schaal; Lianbo Yu; Metin N Gurcan; Aaron C Moberly Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2020-11-10 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Eleanor Layfield; Vasiliki Triantafillou; Aman Prasad; Jie Deng; Rabie M Shanti; Jason G Newman; Karthik Rajasekaran Journal: Head Neck Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 3.821
Authors: Amrita K Singh; David A Kasle; Roy Jiang; Jordan Sukys; Emily L Savoca; Michael Z Lerner; Nikita Kohli Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 2.970