Search

Introduction. Telemedicine was rapidly deployed at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Little has been published on telemedicine in musculoskeletal care prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study is aimed at characterizing trends in telemedicine for musculoskeletal care preceding the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods. This retrospective study used insurance claims from the Truven MarketScan database. Musculoskeletal-specific outpatient visits from 2014 to 2018 were identified using the musculoskeletal major diagnostic category ICD-10 codes. Telemedicine visits were categorized using CPT codes and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding Systems. We described annual trends in telemedicine in the overall dataset and by diagnosis grouping. Multivariable logistic regression modeling estimated the association between patient-specific and telemedicine visit variables and telemedicine utilization. Results. There were 36,672 musculoskeletal-specific telemedicine visits identified (0.020% of all musculoskeletal visits). Overall, telemedicine utilization increased over the study period (0% in 2014 to 0.05% in 2018). Orthopedic surgeons had fewer telemedicine visits than primary care providers (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.55-0.59). The proportion of unique patients utilizing telemedicine in 2018 was higher in the south (OR 2.28, 95% CI 2.19-2.38) and west (OR 5.58, 95% CI 5.36-5.81) compared to the northeast. Those with increased comorbidities and lower incomes and living in rural areas had lower rates of telemedicine utilization. Conclusions. From 2014 to 2018, there was an increase in telemedicine utilization for musculoskeletal visits, in part due to insurance reimbursement and telemedicine regulation. Despite this increase, the rates of telemedicine utilization are still lowest in some of the groups that could derive the most benefit from these services. Establishing this baseline is important for assessing how the roll-out of telemedicine during the pandemic impacted how/which patients and providers are utilizing telemedicine today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The onset of the coronavirus 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic brought together the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) and the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA) to release a joint statement on anesthesia use. Their statement included a recommendation to use regional anesthesia whenever possible to mitigate the risk associated with aerosolizing procedures. We sought to examine the utilization of anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing a surgical procedure for fractures or ligament repairs before and during COVID‐19. Methods: Using the Premier Health Database, we retrospectively analyzed pediatric patients undergoing a surgical intervention for fractures or ligament repair before and during COVID‐19. We sought to determine if there were differences in anesthesia use among this cohort during the two time periods. Fracture groups included shoulder and clavicle, humerus and elbow, forearm and wrist, hand and finger, pelvis and hip, femur and knee, leg and ankles, and foot and toes. Ligament procedures included surgical intervention for the anterior cruciate ligament and ulnar collateral ligament repair. Results: We identified a total of 5935 patients undergoing a surgical procedure for fractures or ligament repairs before and during COVID‐19. After exclusion for unknown anesthesia use, 2,807 patients were included in our cohort with 81.5% (n = 2288) of patients undergoing a procedure under general anesthesia, 6.4% (n = 181) under regional anesthesia, and 12.0% (n = 338) under combined general‐regional anesthesia. There did not appear to be a significant difference in the type of anesthesia used before and during COVID‐19 (p = 0.052). Conclusions: Our study did not identify a difference in anesthesia use before and during COVID‐19 among pediatric patients undergoing a surgical procedure. Further studies should estimate the change in anesthesia used during the time period when elective procedures were resumed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The coronavirus-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted the unfortunate reality that many hospitals have insufficient intensive care unit (ICU) capacity to meet massive, unanticipated increases in demand. To drastically increase ICU capacity, NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center modified its existing operating rooms and post-anaesthesia care units during the initial expansion phase to accommodate the surge of critically ill patients. Methods: This retrospective chart review examined patient care in non-standard Expansion ICUs as compared to standard ICUs. We compared clinical data between the two settings to determine whether the expeditious development and deployment of critical care resources during an evolving medical crisis could provide appropriate care. Results: Sixty-six patients were admitted to Expansion ICUs from March 1st to April 30th, 2020 and 343 were admitted to standard ICUs. Most patients were male (70%), White (30%), 45–64 years old (35%), non-smokers (73%), had hypertension (58%), and were hospitalized for a median of 40 days. For patients that died, there was no difference in treatment management, but the Expansion cohort had a higher median ICU length of stay (q = 0.037) and ventilatory length (q = 0.015). The cohorts had similar rates of discharge to home, but the Expansion ICU cohort had higher rates of discharge to a rehabilitation facility and overall lower mortality. Conclusions: We found no significantly worse outcomes for the Expansion ICU cohort compared to the standard ICU cohort at our institution during the COVID-19 pandemic, which demonstrates the feasibility of providing safe and effective care for patients in an Expansion ICU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]