Search

• High quality communication is one of the key predictors of patient satisfaction. • Patients who perceived physician difficulty in seeing them reported far lower scores. • Patients with difficulty understanding the provider reported perfect scores less often. While recent studies have focused on confirming satisfaction with telemedicine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) era, we leveraged a novel survey instrument to identify associations between patient experience and telemedicine-specific factors such as device selection, audio/visual resolution, and connection stability. Telemedicine visit data were gathered from our institution between June 22, 2020 and February 14, 2021. Each patient indicated their overall visit score, likelihood-to-recommend (LTR) score, and device used for the encounter. Remaining questions were randomly distributed to patients to ensure equal distribution across respondents. Over 34 weeks, there were 901 unique neurosurgical telemedicine visits linked to a post-visit survey at our institution. The LTR top box score percentage showed no significant change across 34 weeks (p = 0.218). After adjusting across available covariates, patients who experienced wait times exceeding 20 min were significantly less likely to report high overall scores (aOR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.03–0.41; p = 0.001). Patients who indicated they were less able to understand the provider (aOR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.07–0.66; p = 0.007), or who indicated the provider was not able to properly see them (aOR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.03–0.43; p = 0.002) were associated with substantially lower overall scores. Visits with interrupted connectivity or those forced to move to a regular phone call were not important predictors of overall score. In the largest description of patient satisfaction with telemedicine in the neurosurgical setting during the COVID-19 era, we identified timely and high-quality physician-patient visualization and communication as among the most important predictors of patient satisfaction in virtual settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• This is the largest retrospective study of patients with brain metastases (BMs). • Over 11 years, the proportion of BMs from breast cancer and melanoma decreased. • In the same period, the proportion of BMs from rare primary sites increased. While the majority of brain metastases arise from lung cancer, breast cancer, or melanoma, new treatments and improved prognoses have altered the profile of primary cancers that metastasize to the brain. We sought to determine the proportion of brain metastases from less common primary sites and conduct trend analyses. We reviewed the charts of 3585 patients with brain metastases seen at our institution from 2008 to 2018. We determined the primary site for each of these patients, and the Mann-Kendall test was used to evaluate temporal trends in the yearly proportion of brain metastases originating from each primary cancer. The five most common primary sites were lung (43.0%), breast (19.9%), melanoma (8.2%), renal (5.0%), and colorectal (3.8%). The proportion of yearly brain metastases originating from breast cancer (p = 0.029) and melanoma (p = 0.013) decreased by 23.8% and 46.7%, respectively, from 2008 (0.21 breast, 0.15 melanoma) to 2018 (0.16 breast, 0.08 melanoma), while no change was found in the proportion of brain metastases from lung, renal, and colorectal cancers. Brain metastases arising from rare primary sites, defined as those comprising at most 2% of all brain metastases, increased by 34.4% (p = 0.005). Limited sample size prohibited trend analysis of other individual primary sites. We report a decrease over 11 years in the proportion of brain metastases originating from breast cancer and melanoma at our institution, and an increase in brain metastases from rare primary sites. Further work with larger, multi-center databases will enable additional evaluation of brain metastases from rare primary sites. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been accompanied by significant reductions in patient volumes for non-COVID-19-related conditions ranging from acute coronary syndrome to ischemic strokes to acute trauma. However, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient volumes for a broad range of orthopedic conditions remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with changes in patient volumes of 35 emergent (e.g. dislocations, open fractures), urgent (e.g. fractures), and nonurgent orthopedic conditions (e.g. osteoarthritis, sprains). A retrospective interrupted time-series analysis of patient volumes was conducted for 35 orthopedic conditions based on ICD-10 diagnosis codes. Patient hospitalizations and new problem visits were aggregated across two institutions in New York state, including one urban tertiary care orthopedic hospital, one urban academic medical center, and all state outpatient facilities affiliated with the orthopedic institution. Patient volumes in the COVID-19 peak period (03/2020–05/2020) and COVID-19 recovery period (06/2020–10/2020) were compared against pre-COVID-19 vol (01/2018–02/2020). Overall, 169,047 cases were included in the analysis across 35 conditions with 3775 emergent cases, 6376 urgent cases, and 158,896 nonurgent cases. During the COVID-19 peak period, patient caseloads for 1 out of 7 emergent conditions (p = 0.02) and 26 out of 28 urgent and nonurgent conditions (p < 0.05) were significantly reduced compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. During the COVID-19 recovery period, patient volumes in 3 out of 13 emergent and urgent conditions (p < 0.03) and 11 out of 22 nonurgent conditions (p < 0.04) were decreased compared to pre-COVID-19 vol. This study found that the pandemic was associated with considerable changes in patient patterns for non-COVID-19 orthopedic conditions. The long-term effects of patient volume reductions on both patient outcomes and orthopedic health systems remain to be seen. Cohort study; level of evidence IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]