Comparison of Two Telemedicine Delivery Modes for Neonatal Resuscitation Support: A Simulation-Based Randomized Trial

Introduction: Previous research has described technical aspects of telemedicine and the clinical impact of provider-to-patient telemedicine; however, little is known about provider-to-provider telemedical interventions. Objective: The primary aim of this study was to compare two telemedicine delivery modes on the quality of a simulated neonatal resuscitation. Our secondary aim was to evaluate the providers’ task load. Methods: This was a prospective, single-center, randomized, simulation-based trial comparing a remote neonatal team leader (“teleleader”) versus a remote consultant (“teleconsultant”). Participants resuscitated a simulated, apneic, and bradycardic neonate. Performance was assessed by video review and task load was measured by the self-reported NASA task load index (NASA-TLX) tool. In the teleleader group, one remote neonatal specialist assumed the role of team leader in the resuscitation. In the teleconsultant group, the same remote specialist assumed the role of teleconsultant. Results: Twenty-two participants were included in the analyses. The teleleader group was associated with a higher overall checklist score compared to teleconsultants (median score 68%, interquartile range [IQR]: 66–69 vs. 58%, IQR: 42–62; p = 0.016). No significant difference was seen in overall subjective workload as measured by the NASA-TLX tool. However, mental demand and frustration were significantly greater with teleconsultants compared to teleleaders (mean mental demand: 14.1 vs. 17.0 out of 21; frustration: 7.9 vs. 14.7 out of 21). Conclusions: Simulated neonates randomized to teams with teleleaders received significantly better resuscitative care compared to those randomized to teams with teleconsultants. Mental demand and frustration were higher for providers in the teleconsultant compared to teleleader teams.