Telestroke’s Role Through the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond

Implementing Telestroke in the Inpatient Setting: Identifying Factors for Success

BACKGROUND

Inpatient telestroke programs have emerged as a solution to provide timely stroke care in underserved areas, but their successful implementation and factors influencing their effectiveness remain underexplored. This study aimed to qualitatively evaluate the perspectives of inpatient clinicians located at spoke hospitals participating in a newly established inpatient telestroke program to identify implementation barriers and facilitators.

METHODS

This was a formative evaluation relying on semistructured qualitative interviews with 16 inpatient providers (physicians and nurse practitioners) at 5 spoke sites of a hub-and-spoke inpatient telestroke program. The Integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework guided data analysis, focusing on the innovation, recipients, context, and facilitation aspects of implementation. Interviews were transcribed and coded using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Fifteen themes were identified in the data and mapped to the Integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. Themes related to the innovation (the telestroke program) included easy access to stroke specialists, the benefits of limiting patient transfers, concerns about duplicating tests, and challenges of timing inpatient telestroke visits and notes to align with discharge workflow. Themes pertaining to recipients (care team members and patients) were communication gaps between teams, concern about the supervision of inpatient telestroke advanced practice providers and challenges with nurse empowerment. With regard to the context (hospital and system factors), providers highlighted familiarity with telehealth technologies as a facilitator to implementing inpatient telestroke, yet highlighted resource limitations in smaller facilities. Facilitation (program implementation) was recognized as crucial for education, standardization, and buy-in.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding barriers and facilitators to implementation is crucial to determining where programmatic changes may need to be made to ensure the success and sustainment of inpatient telestroke services.

Telehealth and Technology: New Directions in Cancer Care

ABSTRACT

Telehealth is a broad concept that refers to any delivery of health care in real time using technologies to connect people or information that are not in the same physical location. Until fairly recently, telehealth was more aspiration than reality. This situation changed radically due in part to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to a near-overnight inability for patients to be seen for routine management of chronic health conditions, including those with cancer. The purpose of this brief narrative review is to outline some areas where emerging and future technology may allow for innovations with specific implications for people with a current or past diagnosis of cancer, including underserved and/or historically excluded populations. Specific topics of telehealth are broadly covered in other areas of the special issue.

Telerehabilitation service impact on physical function and adherence compared to face-to-face rehabilitation in patients with stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to (1) appraise the available evidence of telerehabilitation program effects on functional outcomes, adherence, and patient satisfaction compared to face-to-face programs after stroke; and (2) provide direction for future outcome measure selection and development for clinical research purposes. TYPE: Systematic review and meta analysis of randomized controlled trials.

LITERATURE SURVEY

MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, Proquest Theses and Dissertations, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for studies published in English from 1964 to the end of April 2022.

METHODOLOGY

A total of 6450 studies were identified, 13 were included in the systematic review, and 10 with at least 3 reported similar outcomes were included the meta-analysis. Methodological quality of results was evaluated using the PEDro checklist.

SYNTHESIS

Telerehabilitation demonstrated equivalency in outcomes across several domains and was favored compared to conventional face to face alone or when paired with semisupervised physical therapy on Wolf Motor Function performance score (mean difference [MD] 1.69 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-3.17) and time score (MD 2.07 seconds, 95% CI -4.04 to -0.10, Q test = 30.27, p < .001, I2  = 93%), and Functional Mobility Assessment in the upper extremities (MD 3.32 points, 95% CI 0.90-5.74, Q test = 5.60, p = .23, I2  = 29% alone or when paired with semisupervised physical therapy). The Barthel Index participation measures of function demonstrated improvement (MD 4.18 points, 95% CI, 1.79-6.57, Q test = 3.56, p = .31, I2  = 16%). Over half of summarized study ratings were determined to be of good to excellent quality (PEDro score 6.6 ± 2.3 points). Adherence varied in available studies from 75%-100%. Satisfaction levels of telerehabilitation were highly variable.

CONCLUSIONS

Telerehabilitation can improve functional outcomes and promote therapy adherence after stroke. Therapy protocols and functional assessments need substantial refinement and standardization to improve interpretation and clinical outcomes.