Lucrecia María Burgos, Mariano Benzadón, Alfonsina Candiello, Miguel Hector Cabral, Diego Conde, Alves Alberto de Lima, Jorge Belardi, Mirta Diez
{"title":"Telehealth in Heart Failure Care during COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown in Argentina.","authors":"Lucrecia María Burgos, Mariano Benzadón, Alfonsina Candiello, Miguel Hector Cabral, Diego Conde, Alves Alberto de Lima, Jorge Belardi, Mirta Diez","doi":"10.36628/ijhf.2020.0025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, virtual visits (VVs) were recommended as an innovative and necessary alternative for patients with heart failure (HF). To assess the feasibility and acceptability of VVs in patients with HF, pulmonary hypertension (PH), and heart transplant (HT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We designed a single-centre cohort study. Consecutive VVs performed in our HF unit were analysed. The period comprehended between January 1st and March 19th (before COVID-19) and March 20th and June 30th (during COVID-19) was compared. We assessed acceptability, feasibility and the need for diagnostic studies, in-person medical evaluation, and hospitalization at 30 days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>HF unit medical doctors conducted 22 VVs in the pre-COVID period and 416 VVs during the COVID period. The VV was able to be performed in all patients scheduled for it and 44% answered the survey. Ninety percent of the patients who answered the survey strongly agreed that VVs were easy to be carried out. All the patients \"strongly agreed\" or \"agreed\" that their health problem could be resolved. Most patients (95%) rated the global experience as very good or excellent, with an overall average rate of 9.76±0.5 out of 10. We found no differences regarding the requirement of diagnostic studies, in-person medical evaluation and hospitalization during the first month after VVs between the 2 periods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>VVs were feasible, presented high acceptability, and the overall experience was positive in patients with HF, PH, and HT, being this modality a valuable tool that complements in-person care.</p>","PeriodicalId":14058,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Heart Failure","volume":"2 4","pages":"247-253"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b3/48/ijhf-2-247.PMC9536725.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Heart Failure","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36628/ijhf.2020.0025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
Background and objectives: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, virtual visits (VVs) were recommended as an innovative and necessary alternative for patients with heart failure (HF). To assess the feasibility and acceptability of VVs in patients with HF, pulmonary hypertension (PH), and heart transplant (HT).
Methods: We designed a single-centre cohort study. Consecutive VVs performed in our HF unit were analysed. The period comprehended between January 1st and March 19th (before COVID-19) and March 20th and June 30th (during COVID-19) was compared. We assessed acceptability, feasibility and the need for diagnostic studies, in-person medical evaluation, and hospitalization at 30 days.
Results: HF unit medical doctors conducted 22 VVs in the pre-COVID period and 416 VVs during the COVID period. The VV was able to be performed in all patients scheduled for it and 44% answered the survey. Ninety percent of the patients who answered the survey strongly agreed that VVs were easy to be carried out. All the patients "strongly agreed" or "agreed" that their health problem could be resolved. Most patients (95%) rated the global experience as very good or excellent, with an overall average rate of 9.76±0.5 out of 10. We found no differences regarding the requirement of diagnostic studies, in-person medical evaluation and hospitalization during the first month after VVs between the 2 periods.
Conclusions: VVs were feasible, presented high acceptability, and the overall experience was positive in patients with HF, PH, and HT, being this modality a valuable tool that complements in-person care.