Mohamed Awadallah1, Frank Janssen1, Barbara Körber2, Lorenz Breuer3, Mateusz Scibor3, René Handschu4. 1. Department of Neurology, Klinikum Neumarkt, Neumarkt/OPf, Germany. 2. Department of Emergency, Klinikum Neumarkt, Neumarkt/OPf, Germany. 3. Department of Neurology, STENO Network, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany. 4. Department of Neurology, Klinikum Neumarkt, Neumarkt/OPf, Germany, rene.handschu@fau.de.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: While there are several studies on reliability of telemedicine in assessing stroke scales, little is known about the validity of a general neurological examination performed via telemedicine. Therefore, we sought to test the agreement between bedside and remote examination in acute patients of the emergency room. METHODS: Acute patients at the emergency room of a 450-bed academic teaching hospital were included in this study. A clinical neurological examination consisting of 22 items was performed at bedside and also remotely via an audio-visual link by a different neurologist; both were experienced clinicians at the consultant level. Kappa statistics were calculated for each item of the examination. RESULTS: Forty three patients completed both examinations (mean age 58.3 years, 56% female). Patients were seen between 8 and 72 min after admission (mean 36.3 min). Total time for remote examination was 12.6 min (8-21 min) and 8.9 min (5-18 min) for bedside examination. K-coefficients ranged from 0.32 (muscle tone) - 0.82 (language) indicating a fair to excellent agreement in most items. CONCLUSIONS: Remote examination via an audio-visual link produces comparable results to bedside performance even in acute patients of the emergency room. Compared to the scarce data available, inter-observer agreement is about the same as that between 2 examiners at bedside. However, more studies on reliability and validity of clinical neurological examination are required.
INTRODUCTION: While there are several studies on reliability of telemedicine in assessing stroke scales, little is known about the validity of a general neurological examination performed via telemedicine. Therefore, we sought to test the agreement between bedside and remote examination in acute patients of the emergency room. METHODS: Acute patients at the emergency room of a 450-bed academic teaching hospital were included in this study. A clinical neurological examination consisting of 22 items was performed at bedside and also remotely via an audio-visual link by a different neurologist; both were experienced clinicians at the consultant level. Kappa statistics were calculated for each item of the examination. RESULTS: Forty three patients completed both examinations (mean age 58.3 years, 56% female). Patients were seen between 8 and 72 min after admission (mean 36.3 min). Total time for remote examination was 12.6 min (8-21 min) and 8.9 min (5-18 min) for bedside examination. K-coefficients ranged from 0.32 (muscle tone) - 0.82 (language) indicating a fair to excellent agreement in most items. CONCLUSIONS: Remote examination via an audio-visual link produces comparable results to bedside performance even in acute patients of the emergency room. Compared to the scarce data available, inter-observer agreement is about the same as that between 2 examiners at bedside. However, more studies on reliability and validity of clinical neurological examination are required.
Authors: Jang W Yoon; Rachel L Welch; Todd Alamin; William F Lavelle; Ivan Cheng; Mick Perez-Cruet; Louis C Fielding; Rick C Sasso; R J Linovitz; Kee D Kim; William C Welch Journal: Int J Spine Surg Date: 2020-06-30
Authors: Samantha M R Kling; Jessica J Falco-Walter; Erika A Saliba-Gustafsson; Donn W Garvert; Cati G Brown-Johnson; Rebecca Miller-Kuhlmann; Jonathan G Shaw; Steven M Asch; Laurice Yang; Carl A Gold; Marcy Winget Journal: Neurol Clin Pract Date: 2021-12
Authors: Christopher J Boes; Andrea N Leep Hunderfund; Jennifer M Martinez-Thompson; Neeraj Kumar; Rodolfo Savica; Jeremy K Cutsforth-Gregory; Lyell K Jones Journal: Neurol Clin Pract Date: 2021-04
Authors: Johann Sellner; Thomas M Jenkins; Tim J von Oertzen; Claudio L Bassetti; Ettore Beghi; Daniel Bereczki; Benedetta Bodini; Francesco Cavallieri; Giovanni Di Liberto; Raimund Helbok; Antonella Macerollo; Luis F Maia; Celia Oreja-Guevara; Serefnur Özturk; Martin Rakusa; Antonio Pisani; Alberto Priori; Anna Sauerbier; Riccardo Soffietti; Pille Taba; Marialuisa Zedde; Michael Crean; Anja Burlica; Alex Twardzik; Elena Moro Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 6.288
Authors: Michael E Yurcheshen; Wilfred Pigeon; Carolina Z Marcus; Jonathan A Marcus; Susan Messing; Kevin Nguyen; Jennifer Marsella Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 4.324
Authors: Lekhaj C Daggubati; Daniel G Eichberg; Michael E Ivan; Simon Hanft; Alireza Mansouri; Ricardo J Komotar; Randy S D'Amico; Brad E Zacharia Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2020-05-22 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Elvina Wiadji; Lisa Mackenzie; Patrick Reeder; Jonathan S Gani; Rosemary Carroll; Stephen Smith; Mark Frydenberg; Christine J O'Neill Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2021-02-26 Impact factor: 2.025
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