OBJECTIVE: To assess patient experiences with rapid implementation of ambulatory telehealth during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was performed to characterize the patients' experience with neurology telehealth visits during the first 8 weeks of the COVID-19 response. Consecutive patients who completed a telehealth visit were contacted by telephone. Assenting patients completed a survey quantifying satisfaction with the visit followed by a semistructured telephone interview. Qualitative data were analyzed using the principles of thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2,280 telehealth visits were performed, and 753 patients (33%) were reached for postvisit feedback. Of these, 47% of visits were by video and 53% by telephone. Satisfaction was high, with 77% of patients reporting that all needs were met, although only 51% would consider telehealth in the future. Qualitative themes were constructed, suggesting that positive patient experiences were associated not only with the elimination of commute time and associated costs but also with a positive physician interaction. Negative patient experiences were associated with the inability to complete the neurologic examination. Overall, patients tended to view telehealth as a tool that should augment, and not replace, in-person visits. CONCLUSION: In ambulatory telehealth, patients valued convenience, safety, and physician relationship. Barriers were observed but can be addressed.
OBJECTIVE: To assess patient experiences with rapid implementation of ambulatory telehealth during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was performed to characterize the patients' experience with neurology telehealth visits during the first 8 weeks of the COVID-19 response. Consecutive patients who completed a telehealth visit were contacted by telephone. Assenting patients completed a survey quantifying satisfaction with the visit followed by a semistructured telephone interview. Qualitative data were analyzed using the principles of thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2,280 telehealth visits were performed, and 753 patients (33%) were reached for postvisit feedback. Of these, 47% of visits were by video and 53% by telephone. Satisfaction was high, with 77% of patients reporting that all needs were met, although only 51% would consider telehealth in the future. Qualitative themes were constructed, suggesting that positive patient experiences were associated not only with the elimination of commute time and associated costs but also with a positive physician interaction. Negative patient experiences were associated with the inability to complete the neurologic examination. Overall, patients tended to view telehealth as a tool that should augment, and not replace, in-person visits. CONCLUSION: In ambulatory telehealth, patients valued convenience, safety, and physician relationship. Barriers were observed but can be addressed.
Authors: Opeolu Adeoye; Karin V Nyström; Dileep R Yavagal; Jean Luciano; Raul G Nogueira; Richard D Zorowitz; Alexander A Khalessi; Cheryl Bushnell; William G Barsan; Peter Panagos; Mark J Alberts; A Colby Tiner; Lee H Schwamm; Edward C Jauch Journal: Stroke Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jaime M Hatcher-Martin; Jamie Lynn Adams; Eric R Anderson; Riley Bove; Tamika M Burrus; Mahan Chehrenama; Mary Dolan O'Brien; Dawn S Eliashiv; Deniz Erten-Lyons; Barbara S Giesser; Lauren R Moo; Pushpa Narayanaswami; Marvin A Rossi; Madhu Soni; Nauman Tariq; Jack W Tsao; Bert B Vargas; Scott A Vota; Scott R Wessels; Hannah Planalp; Raghav Govindarajan Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Anhar Hassan; E Ray Dorsey; Christopher G Goetz; Bastiaan R Bloem; Mark Guttman; Caroline M Tanner; Zoltan Mari; Alexander Pantelyat; Nicholas B Galifianakis; Jawad A Bajwa; Emilia M Gatto; Esther Cubo Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Roy E Strowd; Lauren Strauss; Rachel Graham; Kristen Dodenhoff; Allysen Schreiber; Sharon Thomson; Alexander Ambrosini; Annie Madeline Thurman; Carly Olszewski; L Daniela Smith; Michael S Cartwright; Amy Guzik; Rebecca Erwin Wells; Heidi Munger Clary; John Malone; Mustapha Ezzeddine; Pamela W Duncan; Charles H Tegeler Journal: Neurol Clin Pract Date: 2021-06
Authors: Lawrence R Wechsler; Jack W Tsao; Steven R Levine; Rebecca J Swain-Eng; Robert J Adams; Bart M Demaerschalk; David C Hess; Elena Moro; Lee H Schwamm; Steve Steffensen; Barney J Stern; Steven J Zuckerman; Pratik Bhattacharya; Larry E Davis; Ilana R Yurkiewicz; Aimee L Alphonso Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-02-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Clemens Scott Kruse; Nicole Krowski; Blanca Rodriguez; Lan Tran; Jackeline Vela; Matthew Brooks Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-08-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Roy E Strowd; Erin M Dunbar; Hui K Gan; Sylvia Kurz; Justin T Jordan; Jacob J Mandel; Nimish A Mohile; Kathryn S Nevel; Jennie W Taylor; Nicole J Ullrich; Mary R Welch; Andrea Wasilewski; Maciej M Mrugala Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2022-01-17
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