Srikanth Muppidi1, Richard J Nowak2, Amanda C Guidon3, Jeffrey T Guptill4, Michael K Hehir5, Katherine Ruzhansky6, Leeann B Burton3, David Post1, Gary Cutter7, Robin Conwit8, Nicte I Mejia3, Henry J Kaminski9, James F Howard10. 1. Department of Neurology, Stanford University Hospital, Palo Alto, California, USA. 2. Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. 3. Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. Department of Neurology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 5. Department of Neurological Sciences, Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, USA. 6. Department of Neurology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA. 7. Department of Biostatistics, University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama, USA. 8. Division of Clinical Research, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, NINDS, Rockville, Maryland, USA. 9. Department of Neurology, George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA. 10. Department of Neurology, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Telemedicine may be particularly well-suited for myasthenia gravis (MG) due to the disorder's need for specialized care, its hallmark fluctuating muscle weakness, and the potential for increased risk of virus exposure among patients with MG during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic during in-person clinical visits. A disease-specific telemedicine physical examination to reflect myasthenic weakness does not currently exist. METHODS: This paper outlines step-by-step guidance on the fundamentals of a telemedicine assessment for MG. The Myasthenia Gravis Core Exam (MG-CE) is introduced as a MG-specific, telemedicine, physical examination, which contains eight components (ptosis, diplopia, facial strength, bulbar strength, dysarthria, single breath count, arm strength, and sit to stand) and takes approximately 10 minutes to complete. RESULTS: Pre-visit preparation, remote ascertainment of patient-reported outcome scales and visit documentation are also addressed. DISCUSSION: Additional knowledge gaps in telemedicine specific to MG care are identified for future investigation.
INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Telemedicine may be particularly well-suited for myasthenia gravis (MG) due to the disorder's need for specialized care, its hallmark fluctuating muscle weakness, and the potential for increased risk of virus exposure among patients with MG during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic during in-person clinical visits. A disease-specific telemedicine physical examination to reflect myasthenic weakness does not currently exist. METHODS: This paper outlines step-by-step guidance on the fundamentals of a telemedicine assessment for MG. The Myasthenia Gravis Core Exam (MG-CE) is introduced as a MG-specific, telemedicine, physical examination, which contains eight components (ptosis, diplopia, facial strength, bulbar strength, dysarthria, single breath count, arm strength, and sit to stand) and takes approximately 10 minutes to complete. RESULTS: Pre-visit preparation, remote ascertainment of patient-reported outcome scales and visit documentation are also addressed. DISCUSSION: Additional knowledge gaps in telemedicine specific to MG care are identified for future investigation.
Authors: Lee H Schwamm; Neale Chumbler; Ed Brown; Gregg C Fonarow; David Berube; Karin Nystrom; Robert Suter; Mirian Zavala; Daniel Polsky; Kavita Radhakrishnan; Nathaniel Lacktman; Katherine Horton; Mary-Beth Malcarney; John Halamka; A Colby Tiner Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-12-20 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Cyrus K Yamin; Srinivas Emani; Deborah H Williams; Stuart R Lipsitz; Andrew S Karson; Jonathan S Wald; David W Bates Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2011-03-28
Authors: Irl B Hirsch; Joe Martinez; E Ray Dorsey; Gerald Finken; Alexander Fleming; Chris Gropp; Philip Home; Daniel I Kaufer; Spyros Papapetropoulos Journal: Clin Ther Date: 2017-04-14 Impact factor: 3.393
Authors: Ted M Burns; Reza Sadjadi; Kimiaki Utsugisawa; Kelly G Gwathmey; Amruta Joshi; Sarah Jones; Vera Bril; Carolina Barnett; Jeffrey T Guptill; Donald B Sanders; Lisa Hobson-Webb; Vern C Juel; Janice Massey; Karissa L Gable; Nicholas J Silvestri; Gil Wolfe; Gary Cutter; Yuriko Nagane; Hiroyuki Murai; Masayuki Masuda; Maria Elena Farrugia; Caroline Carmichael; Simone Birnbaum; Jean-Yves Hogrel; Shahriar Nafissi; Farzad Fatehi; Changyi Ou; Weibin Liu; Mark Conaway Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2016-11-07 Impact factor: 3.217
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: F Pasqualin; S V Guidoni; E Albertini; M Ermani; R Frangiamore; F Vanoli; C Antozzi; R Mantegazza; D M Bonifati Journal: Neurol Sci Date: 2022-02-28 Impact factor: 3.307
Authors: Komal Hafeez; Hani Kushlaf; Husam Al-Sultani; Anny-Claude Joseph; Zoya Zaeem; Zaeem Siddiqi; Shannon Laboy; Michael Pulley; Ali A Habib; Nathaniel M Robbins; Sean Zadeh; Muhammad Ubaid Hafeez; Yessar Hussain; Alexandria Melendez-Zaidi; Charles Kassardjian; Kristin Johnson; Holly Leonhard; Suur Biliciler; Jorge E Patino Murillas; Aziz I Shaibani Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2022-06-03 Impact factor: 3.852