No abstract

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to characterize differences in patient reported outcomes using telehealth compared with in‐person follow‐up visits in patients with Achilles tendinopathy (AT) or plantar fasciitis (PF) treated using extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT).DesignChart review of a single sports medicine provider identified 82 and 46 patients with AT and PF, respectively, with further categorization into in‐person (n=76) or telehealth (n=52) follow‐up. Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment‐Achilles (VISA‐A) for AT and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) for PF, as well as billing level was compared.ResultsThere was significant improvement from baseline to final VISA‐A (p<0.01) and FAAM (p<0.01) following ESWT. No significant difference existed in the proportion of patients who met the minimal clinically important difference based on in‐person (71.1%) versus telehealth (71.2%) follow up (p=0.99). The in‐person group demonstrated higher billing levels compared to the telehealth group (Level: 3.5 ± 0.6 versus 2.8 ± 0.7, p<0.01).ConclusionGiven no significant differences in outcomes between two modes of follow‐ups, telehealth may serve as an alternative method to guide management of musculoskeletal injuries with shockwave and other procedures.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.