Noah S Llaneras, Ruby L Taylor, Jonah P M Orr, Rachel Alessio, Carolyn Carper, Brendan M Patterson, Susan E Mackinnon
{"title":"Telemedicine in Nerve Surgery: An Effective Method to Determine Indications for Surgery.","authors":"Noah S Llaneras, Ruby L Taylor, Jonah P M Orr, Rachel Alessio, Carolyn Carper, Brendan M Patterson, Susan E Mackinnon","doi":"10.1097/GOX.0000000000006892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine for surgical consultations. Although patient satisfaction has been well documented, limited research exists regarding telemedicine's effectiveness in determining the ability to indicate for surgical care compared with in-office visits. We conducted a retrospective review comparing surgical decision-making via telemedicine versus in-person consultations, hypothesizing that in-office visits would be more effective in establishing a surgical plan than telemedicine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of the medical records of all new patients presenting to the senior author's nerve surgery clinic at a high-volume quaternary referral center between June 2020 and January 2023 was performed. Surgical consultations were categorized as (1) surgery recommended, (2) surgery not recommended, (3) further screening required, or (4) surgery declined. The Fisher exact test compared the distribution of these categories between consultation types and the proportion of patients who underwent surgery after an initial recommendation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 809 patients, 283 (35%) had in-person and 526 (65%) had telemedicine consultations. Surgery was recommended in 49.5% of in-person consultations compared with 38% of telemedicine consultations (<i>P</i> = 0.03). Among those recommended for surgery at the initial visit, 77.9% of in-person and 77.8% of telemedicine patients ultimately underwent surgery (<i>P</i> = 0.10). Of the telemedicine patients subsequently seen in the office and offered surgery, 84.5% ultimately underwent that surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings suggest that telemedicine and in-office visits are equally effective in establishing a surgical plan, suggesting that the expansion of telemedicine could be considered for a broader geographic patient base.</p>","PeriodicalId":20149,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","volume":"13 6","pages":"e6892"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12200210/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000006892","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine for surgical consultations. Although patient satisfaction has been well documented, limited research exists regarding telemedicine's effectiveness in determining the ability to indicate for surgical care compared with in-office visits. We conducted a retrospective review comparing surgical decision-making via telemedicine versus in-person consultations, hypothesizing that in-office visits would be more effective in establishing a surgical plan than telemedicine.
Methods: A retrospective review of the medical records of all new patients presenting to the senior author's nerve surgery clinic at a high-volume quaternary referral center between June 2020 and January 2023 was performed. Surgical consultations were categorized as (1) surgery recommended, (2) surgery not recommended, (3) further screening required, or (4) surgery declined. The Fisher exact test compared the distribution of these categories between consultation types and the proportion of patients who underwent surgery after an initial recommendation.
Results: Of the 809 patients, 283 (35%) had in-person and 526 (65%) had telemedicine consultations. Surgery was recommended in 49.5% of in-person consultations compared with 38% of telemedicine consultations (P = 0.03). Among those recommended for surgery at the initial visit, 77.9% of in-person and 77.8% of telemedicine patients ultimately underwent surgery (P = 0.10). Of the telemedicine patients subsequently seen in the office and offered surgery, 84.5% ultimately underwent that surgery.
Conclusions: Our findings suggest that telemedicine and in-office visits are equally effective in establishing a surgical plan, suggesting that the expansion of telemedicine could be considered for a broader geographic patient base.
期刊介绍:
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open is an open access, peer reviewed, international journal focusing on global plastic and reconstructive surgery.Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open publishes on all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including basic science/experimental studies pertinent to the field and also clinical articles on such topics as: breast reconstruction, head and neck surgery, pediatric and craniofacial surgery, hand and microsurgery, wound healing, and cosmetic and aesthetic surgery. Clinical studies, experimental articles, ideas and innovations, and techniques and case reports are all welcome article types. Manuscript submission is open to all surgeons, researchers, and other health care providers world-wide who wish to communicate their research results on topics related to plastic and reconstructive surgery. Furthermore, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open, a complimentary journal to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, provides an open access venue for the publication of those research studies sponsored by private and public funding agencies that require open access publication of study results. Its mission is to disseminate high quality, peer reviewed research in plastic and reconstructive surgery to the widest possible global audience, through an open access platform. As an open access journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open offers its content for free to any viewer. Authors of articles retain their copyright to the materials published. Additionally, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open provides rapid review and publication of accepted papers.