Objective: To characterize variables associated with referral to the emergency department following Telemedicine consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Cross-sectional retrospective study conducted between March and May 2020, with a sample of 500 adult patients. The inclusion criterion was the manifestation of respiratory symptoms, regardless of type. Results: The mean age of patients was 34.7±10.5 years, and 59% were women. Most patients (62.6%) perceived their own health status as malaise and some (41.4%) self-diagnosed COVID-19. Cough (74.4%), rhinorrhea (65.6%), sore throat (38.6%) and sneezing (20.6%) were the most common infection-related symptoms. Overall, 29.4% and 16% of patients reported dyspnea and chest pain, respectively. The Roth score was calculated for a sizeable number of patients (67.6%) and was normal, moderately altered or severely altered in 83.5%, 10.7% and 5.6% of patients, respectively. The percentage of suspected COVID-19 cases was 67.6%. Of these, 75% were managed remotely and only one quarter referred for emergency assessment. Conclusion: Telemedicine assessment is associated with reclassification of patient's subjective impression, better inspection of coronavirus disease 2019 and identification of risk patients. Referral is therefore optimized to avoid inappropriate in-person assessment, and low-risk patients can be properly guided. Telemedicine should be implemented in the health care system as a cost-effective strategy for initial assessment of acute patients.

Background Feasibility and safety of ambulance transport between healthcare facilities with medical support exclusively via telemedicine are unknown. Methods This was a retrospective study with a single telemedicine center reference for satellite emergency departments of the same hospital. The study population was all critically ill patients admitted to one of the peripheral units from November 2016 to May 2020 and who needed to be transferred to the main building. Telemedicine-assisted transportation was performed by an emergency specialist. The inclusion criteria included patients above the age of 15 and initial stabilization performed at the emergency department. Unstable, intubated, ST-elevation myocardial infarction and acute stroke patients were excluded. There was a double-check of safety conditions by the nurse and the remote doctor before the ambulance departure. The primary endpoint was the number of telemedicine-guided interventions during transport. Results 2840 patients were enrolled. The population was predominantly male (53.2%) with a median age of 60 years. Sepsis was the most prevalent diagnosis in 28% of patients, followed by acute coronary syndromes (8.5%), arrhythmia (6.7%), venous thromboembolism (6.1%), stroke (6.1%), acute abdomen (3.6%), respiratory distress (3.3%), and heart failure (2.5%). Only 22 (0.8%) patients required telemedicine-assisted support during transport. Administration of oxygen therapy and analgesics were the most common recommendations made by telemedicine emergency physicians. There were no communication problems in the telemedicine-assisted group. Conclusions Telemedicine-assisted ambulance transportation between healthcare facilities of stabilized critically ill patients may be an option instead of an onboard physician. The frequency of clinical support requests by telemedicine is minimal, and most evaluations are of low complexity and easily and safely performed by trained nurses.

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of telemedicine using a standardized multiorgan ultrasound assessment protocol to guide untrained on-site general practitioners at a field hospital during a life-threatening crisis. Materials and Methods: We evaluated 11 inpatients with shock, with or without acute dyspnea, for whom general practitioners spontaneously requested remote evaluation by a specialist. Results: All of the general practitioners accepted the protocol and were able to position the transducer correctly, thus obtaining key images of the internal jugular vein, lungs, and inferior vena cava when guided remotely by a telemedicine physician, who interpreted all of the findings. However, only four (36%) of the on-site general practitioners obtained the appropriate key image of the heart in the left parasternal long-axis view, and only three (27%) received an immediate interpretation of an image from the remote physician. The mean evaluation time was 22.7 ± 12 min (range, 7-42 min). Conclusion: Even in life-threatening situations, untrained general practitioners may be correctly guided by telemedicine specialists to perform multiorgan point-of-care ultrasound in order to improve bedside diagnostic evaluation.

No abstract

Background: Feasibility and safety of ambulance transport between healthcare facilities with medical support exclusively via telemedicine is unknown. Methods: This was a retrospective study with a single telemedicine center reference for satellite emergency departments of the same hospital. Study population was all critically ill patients admitted to one of the peripheral units, from November 2016 to May 2020, and who needed to be transferred to the main building. Telemedicine-assisted transportation was performed by an emergency specialist. For inclusion, the criteria demanded the patients above the age of 15 years and initial stabilization be performed at the emergency department. Unstable, intubated, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and acute stroke patients were excluded. The primary endpoint was the number of telemedicine-guided interventions during transport. Results: 2840 patients were enrolled. The population was predominantly male (53.2%) with a median age of 60 years. Sepsis was the most prevalent diagnosis in 28% of patients, followed by acute coronary syndromes (8.5%), arrhythmia (6.7%), venous thromboembolism (6.1%), stroke (6.1%), acute abdomen (3.6%), respiratory distress (3.3%), and heart failure (2.5%). Only 22 (0.8%) patients required telemedicine-assisted support during transport. Administration of oxygen therapy and analgesics were the main remotely-oriented interventions. There were no communication problems in the telemedicine-assisted group. Conclusions: Telemedicine-assisted ambulance transportation of stabilized critically ill patients can effectively and safely substitute an onboard physician on most transfers between same-institution locations.