STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to design and test a novel spine neurological examination adapted for telemedicine. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Telemedicine is a rapidly evolving technology associated with numerous potential benefits for health care, especially in the modern era of value-based care. To date, no studies have assessed whether. METHODS: Twenty-one healthy controls and 20 patients with cervical or lumbar spinal disease (D) were prospectively enrolled. Each patient underwent a telemedicine neurological examination as well as a traditional in-person neurological examination administered by a fellowship trained spine surgeon and a physiatrist. Both the telemedicine and in-person tests consisted of motor, sensory, and special test components. Scores were compared via univariate analysis and secondary qualitative outcomes, including responses from a satisfaction survey, were obtained upon completion of the trial. RESULTS: Of the 20 patients in the D group, 9 patients had cervical disease and 11 patients had lumbar disease. Comparing healthy control with the D group, there were no significant differences with respect to all motor scores, most sensory scores, and all special tests. There was a high rate of satisfaction among the cohort with 92.7% of participants feeling "very satisfied" with the overall experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the development of a viable neurological spine examination adapted for telemedicine. The findings in this study suggest that patients have comparable motor, sensory, and special test scores with telemedicine as with a traditional in-person examination administered by an experienced clinician, as well as reporting a high rate of satisfaction among participants. To our knowledge, this is the first telemedicine neurological examination for spine surgery. Further studies are warranted to validate these findings.
STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to design and test a novel spine neurological examination adapted for telemedicine. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Telemedicine is a rapidly evolving technology associated with numerous potential benefits for health care, especially in the modern era of value-based care. To date, no studies have assessed whether. METHODS: Twenty-one healthy controls and 20 patients with cervical or lumbar spinal disease (D) were prospectively enrolled. Each patient underwent a telemedicine neurological examination as well as a traditional in-person neurological examination administered by a fellowship trained spine surgeon and a physiatrist. Both the telemedicine and in-person tests consisted of motor, sensory, and special test components. Scores were compared via univariate analysis and secondary qualitative outcomes, including responses from a satisfaction survey, were obtained upon completion of the trial. RESULTS: Of the 20 patients in the D group, 9 patients had cervical disease and 11 patients had lumbar disease. Comparing healthy control with the D group, there were no significant differences with respect to all motor scores, most sensory scores, and all special tests. There was a high rate of satisfaction among the cohort with 92.7% of participants feeling "very satisfied" with the overall experience. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents the development of a viable neurological spine examination adapted for telemedicine. The findings in this study suggest that patients have comparable motor, sensory, and special test scores with telemedicine as with a traditional in-person examination administered by an experienced clinician, as well as reporting a high rate of satisfaction among participants. To our knowledge, this is the first telemedicine neurological examination for spine surgery. Further studies are warranted to validate these findings.
Authors: Grant J Riew; Francis Lovecchio; Dino Samartzis; David N Bernstein; Ellen Y Underwood; Philip K Louie; Niccole Germscheid; Howard S An; Jason Pui Yin Cheung; Norman Chutkan; Gary Michael Mallow; Marko H Neva; Frank M Phillips; Daniel M Sciubba; Mohammad El-Sharkawi; Marcelo Valacco; Michael H McCarthy; Sravisht Iyer; Melvin C Makhni Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2021-01-16 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Ivan B Ye; Alexandra E Thomson; Navid Chowdhury; Brittany Oster; Vincent S Miseo; Julio J Jauregui; Daniel Cavanaugh; Eugene Koh; Daniel Gelb; Steven Ludwig Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2022-04-11
Authors: Timothy D Malouff; Sarvam P TerKonda; Dacre Knight; Abd Moain Abu Dabrh; Adam I Perlman; Bala Munipalli; Daniel V Dudenkov; Michael G Heckman; Launia J White; Katey M Wert; Jorge M Pascual; Fernando A Rivera; Michelle M Shoaei; Michelle A Leak; Anna C Harrell; Daniel M Trifiletti; Steven J Buskirk Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes Date: 2021-07-01