» Articles » PMID: 37297714

Feasibility Using Telehealth for Planning Use of Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy in a Sports Medicine Clinic

Overview
Specialty Health Services
Date 2023 Jun 10
PMID 37297714
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

(1) Background: The purpose of this study is to describe whether telehealth compared with in-person visits, led to a similar agreement of primary diagnosis reached at the time of procedure using extracorporeal shockwave therapy. (2) Methods: This retrospective study consisted of chart reviews of all new patients evaluated in a sports medicine clinic prior to performing extracorporeal shockwave therapy from April 2020 to March 2021. The primary outcome of the study was describing agreement in primary diagnosis at the time of evaluation (telehealth and in-person) and during the procedure using extracorporeal shockwave therapy. Logistic regression was utilized to identify patient characteristics that may predict agreement of diagnosis using telehealth. (3) Results: The chart review identified 166 patients (45 telehealth and 121 in-person) evaluated for extracorporeal shockwave therapy. Agreement of diagnosis was similar for patients evaluated using telehealth compared to in-person visits (84% vs. 92%, Χ = 1.90, = 0.168). Agreement on diagnosis was more likely in patients who started shockwave within the 1 week of initial visit (OR = 8.27, 95% CI = 1.69-45.29), patients over age 60 (OR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.90-0.99), and in patients without a history of osteoarthritis (OR = 14.00, 95% CI = 1.88-113.46). (4) Conclusions: Telehealth resulted in a similar agreement to in-person visits to identify a primary diagnosis for planning extracorporeal shockwave therapy. Telehealth may be a reasonable alternative to in-person visits for procedural planning of extracorporeal shockwave therapy.

References
1.
Rasmussen S, Christensen M, Mathiesen I, Simonson O . Shockwave therapy for chronic Achilles tendinopathy: a double-blind, randomized clinical trial of efficacy. Acta Orthop. 2008; 79(2):249-56. DOI: 10.1080/17453670710015058. View

2.
Cacchio A, Giordano L, Colafarina O, Rompe J, Tavernese E, Ioppolo F . Extracorporeal shock-wave therapy compared with surgery for hypertrophic long-bone nonunions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91(11):2589-97. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00841. View

3.
Furia J, Rompe J, Maffulli N . Low-energy extracorporeal shock wave therapy as a treatment for greater trochanteric pain syndrome. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37(9):1806-13. DOI: 10.1177/0363546509333014. View

4.
Lightsey 4th H, Yeung C, Bernstein D, Sumathipala M, Chen A, Schoenfeld A . Patient Experiences of Telemedicine in Spine Care: A Mixed Methods Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021; 47(1):27-33. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004188. View

5.
Lou J, Wang S, Liu S, Xing G . Effectiveness of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy Without Local Anesthesia in Patients With Recalcitrant Plantar Fasciitis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016; 96(8):529-534. DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000666. View