TY - JOUR
T1 - Provider confidence in the telemedicine spine evaluation
T2 - results from a global study
AU - Lovecchio, Francis
AU - Riew, Grant J.
AU - Samartzis, Dino
AU - Louie, Philip K.
AU - Germscheid, Niccole
AU - An, Howard S.
AU - Cheung, Jason Pui Yin
AU - Chutkan, Norman
AU - Mallow, Gary Michael
AU - Neva, Marko H.
AU - Phillips, Frank M.
AU - Sciubba, Daniel M.
AU - El-Sharkawi, Mohammad
AU - Valacco, Marcelo
AU - McCarthy, Michael H.
AU - Makhni, Melvin C.
AU - Iyer, Sravisht
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to extend their sincere gratitude to Kaija Kurki-Suonio and Fernando Kijel from AO Spine (Davos, Switzerland) for their assistance with circulating the survey to AO Spine members.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, The Author(s).
PY - 2021/8
Y1 - 2021/8
N2 - Purpose: To utilize data from a global spine surgeon survey to elucidate (1) overall confidence in the telemedicine evaluation and (2) determinants of provider confidence. Methods: Members of AO Spine International were sent a survey encompassing participant’s experience with, perception of, and comparison of telemedicine to in-person visits. The survey was designed through a Delphi approach, with four rounds of question review by the multi-disciplinary authors. Data were stratified by provider age, experience, telemedicine platform, trust in telemedicine, and specialty. Results: Four hundred and eighty-five surgeons participated in the survey. The global effort included respondents from Africa (19.9%), Asia Pacific (19.7%), Europe (24.3%), North America (9.4%), and South America (26.6%). Providers felt that physical exam-based tasks (e.g., provocative testing, assessing neurologic deficits/myelopathy, etc.) were inferior to in-person exams, while communication-based aspects (e.g., history taking, imaging review, etc.) were equivalent. Participants who performed greater than 50 visits were more likely to believe telemedicine was at least equivalent to in-person visits in the ability to make an accurate diagnosis (OR 2.37, 95% C.I. 1.03–5.43). Compared to in-person encounters, video (versus phone only) visits were associated with increased confidence in the ability of telemedicine to formulate and communicate a treatment plan (OR 3.88, 95% C.I. 1.71–8.84). Conclusion: Spine surgeons are confident in the ability of telemedicine to communicate with patients, but are concerned about its capacity to accurately make physical exam-based diagnoses. Future research should concentrate on standardizing the remote examination and the development of appropriate use criteria in order to increase provider confidence in telemedicine technology.
AB - Purpose: To utilize data from a global spine surgeon survey to elucidate (1) overall confidence in the telemedicine evaluation and (2) determinants of provider confidence. Methods: Members of AO Spine International were sent a survey encompassing participant’s experience with, perception of, and comparison of telemedicine to in-person visits. The survey was designed through a Delphi approach, with four rounds of question review by the multi-disciplinary authors. Data were stratified by provider age, experience, telemedicine platform, trust in telemedicine, and specialty. Results: Four hundred and eighty-five surgeons participated in the survey. The global effort included respondents from Africa (19.9%), Asia Pacific (19.7%), Europe (24.3%), North America (9.4%), and South America (26.6%). Providers felt that physical exam-based tasks (e.g., provocative testing, assessing neurologic deficits/myelopathy, etc.) were inferior to in-person exams, while communication-based aspects (e.g., history taking, imaging review, etc.) were equivalent. Participants who performed greater than 50 visits were more likely to believe telemedicine was at least equivalent to in-person visits in the ability to make an accurate diagnosis (OR 2.37, 95% C.I. 1.03–5.43). Compared to in-person encounters, video (versus phone only) visits were associated with increased confidence in the ability of telemedicine to formulate and communicate a treatment plan (OR 3.88, 95% C.I. 1.71–8.84). Conclusion: Spine surgeons are confident in the ability of telemedicine to communicate with patients, but are concerned about its capacity to accurately make physical exam-based diagnoses. Future research should concentrate on standardizing the remote examination and the development of appropriate use criteria in order to increase provider confidence in telemedicine technology.
KW - Examination
KW - International
KW - Spine surgery
KW - Survey
KW - Telemedicine
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85096399001&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85096399001&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00586-020-06653-8
DO - 10.1007/s00586-020-06653-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 33222003
AN - SCOPUS:85096399001
VL - 30
SP - 2109
EP - 2123
JO - European Spine Journal
JF - European Spine Journal
SN - 0940-6719
IS - 8
ER -