Demaerschalk, Bart M.

The use of 2-way audiovisual telemedicine technology for the delivery of acute stroke care is well established in the literature and is a growing practice. The use of such technology for neurologic consultation outside the cerebrovascular specialty has been reported to a variable extent across most disciplines within the field of neurology, including that of the neurohospitalist medicine. A systematic review of these reports is lacking. Hence, the main purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature on teleneurologic consultation in hospital neurology. The databases Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane were used as data sources and were searched with key words “teleneurology” and its numerous synonyms and cognates. These key words were cross-referenced with subspecialties of neurology. The studies were included for further review only if the title or the abstract indicated that the study made use of 2-way audiovisual communication to address a neurologic indication. This search yielded 6625 abstracts. By consensus between the 2 investigators, 688 publications met the criteria for inclusion and further review. Four of those citations directly pertained to the inpatient hospital neurologic consultation. Each of the 4 relevant articles was scored with a novel rubric scoring functionality, application, technology, and evaluation phase. A subspecialty category score was calculated by averaging those scores. The use of 2-way audiovisual technology for general neurologic consultation of hospital inpatients, beyond stroke-related care, is promising, but the evidence supporting its routine use is weak. Further studies on reliability, validity, safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness are encouraged.

Background— A hub-and-spoke telestroke network is an effective way to extend quality acute stroke care to remote hospitals and to improve patient outcomes. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of a telestroke network in the management of acute ischemic stroke from the perspectives of a network, a hub hospital, and a spoke hospital. Methods and Results— A model was developed to compare costs and effectiveness with and without a telestroke network over a 5-year time horizon. The model considered differences in rates of teleconsultations, intravenous thrombolysis, endovascular stroke therapies, and spoke-to-hub transfers. These inputs were estimated through the use of data from Georgia Health Sciences University and Mayo Clinic telestroke networks. A network model with 1 hub and 7 spokes predicted that 45 more patients would be treated with intravenous thrombolysis and 20 more with endovascular stroke therapies per year compared with no network, leading to an estimate of 6.11 more home discharges. Each year, a telestroke network was associated with $358 435 in cost savings; each spoke had $109 080 in cost savings, whereas the hub had positive costs of $405 121. However, cost sharing can be arranged so that each hospital could achieve an equal amount of cost savings ($44 804/y). Results were sensitive to the number of spokes, marginal treatment costs in spokes and rates of transfer, and endovascular stroke therapies. Conclusions— The results of this study suggest that a telestroke network may increase the number of patients discharged home and reduce the costs borne by the network hospitals. Hospitals should consider their available resources and the network features when deciding whether to join or set up a network.

Background and Purpose— Telestroke reduces acute stroke care disparities between urban stroke centers and rural hospitals. Current technologies used to conduct remote patient assessments have high start-up costs, yet they cannot consistently establish quality timely connections. Smartphones can be used for high-quality video teleconferencing. They are inexpensive and ubiquitous among health care providers. We aimed to study the reliability of high-quality video teleconferencing using smartphones for conducting the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Methods— Two vascular neurologists assessed 100 stroke patients with the NIHSS. The remote vascular neurologist assessed subjects using smartphone videoconferencing with the assistance of a bedside medical aide. The bedside vascular neurologist scored patients contemporaneously. Each vascular neurologist was blinded to the other’s NIHSS scores. We tested the inter-method agreement and physician satisfaction with the device. Results— We demonstrated high total NIHSS score correlation between the methods ( r =0.949; P <0.001). The mean total NIHSS scores for bedside and remote assessments were 7.93±8.10 and 7.28±7.85, with ranges, of 0 to 35 and 0 to 37, respectively. Eight categories had high agreement: level of consciousness (questions), level of consciousness (commands), visual fields, motor left and right (arm and leg), and best language. Six categories had moderate agreement: level of consciousness (consciousness), best gaze, facial palsy, sensory, dysarthria, and extinction/inattention. Ataxia had poor agreement. There was high physician satisfaction with the smartphone. Conclusions— Smartphone high-quality video teleconferencing is reliable, easy to use, affordable for telestroke NIHSS administration, and has high physician satisfaction.

Concussion awareness and management in sports have gained a great deal of attention in light of research illustrating the potentially devastating consequences of repeated traumatic brain injuries. In order to address this public health crisis, numerous states have passed legislation that mandates medical clearance before being eligible to return to play of concussed athletes by a qualified healthcare provider. As the number of qualified healthcare providers with expertise in the diagnosis and management of concussions remains very small, patient safety and the ability to fulfill these legislative return-to-play requirements present unique problems to rural communities without easy access to subspecialty care. Telemedicine is a possible means by which to address the needs of the rural student-athlete.

Background and Purpose— The American Stroke Association guidelines emphasized the need for further high-quality studies that assess agreement by radiologists and nonradiologists engaged in emergency telestroke assessments and decision-making. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the level of agreement of baseline brain CT scan interpretations of patients with acute stroke presenting to telestroke spoke hospitals between central reading committee neuroradiologists and each of 2 groups, spoke hospital radiologists and hub hospital vascular neurologists (telestrokologists). Methods— The Stroke Team Remote Evaluation Using a Digital Observation Camera Arizona trial was a prospective, urban single-hub, rural 2-spoke, randomized, blinded, controlled trial of a 2-way, site-independent, audiovisual telemedicine and teleradiology system designed for remote evaluation of adult patients with acute stroke versus telephone consultation to assess eligibility for treatment with intravenous thrombolysis. In the telemedicine arm, the subjects’ CT scans were interpreted by the hub telestrokologist and in the telephone arm by the spoke radiologist. All subjects’ CT scans were subsequently interpreted centrally, independently, and blindly by 2 hub neuroradiologists. The primary CT outcome was determination of a CT-based contraindication to thrombolytic treatment. Kappa statistics and exact agreement rates were used to analyze interobserver agreement. Results— Fifty-four subjects underwent random assignment. The overall agreement for the presence of radiological contraindications to thrombolysis was excellent (0.91) and did not differ substantially between the hub telestrokologist to neuroradiologist and spoke radiologist to neuroradiologist (0.92 and 0.89, respectively). Conclusions— In the context of a telestroke network designed to assess patients with acute stroke syndromes, agreement over the presence or absence of radiological contraindications to thrombolysis was excellent whether the comparisons were between a telestrokologist and neuroradiologist or between spoke radiologist and neuroradiologist. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00623350.

Background and Purpose— ResolutionMD mobile application runs on a Smartphone and affords vascular neurologists access to radiological images of patients with stroke from remote sites in the context of a telemedicine evaluation. Although reliability studies using this technology have been conducted in a controlled environment, this study is the first to incorporate it into a real-world hub and spoke telestroke network. The study objective was to assess the level of agreement of brain CT scan interpretation in a telestroke network between hub vascular neurologists using ResolutionMD, spoke radiologists using a Picture Archiving and Communications System, and independent adjudicators. Methods— Fifty-three patients with stroke at the spoke hospital consented to receive a telemedicine consultation and participate in a registry. Each CT was evaluated by a hub vascular neurologist, a spoke radiologist, and by blinded telestroke adjudicators, and agreement over clinically important radiological features was calculated. Results— Agreement ( κ and 95% CI) between hub vascular neurologists using ResolutionMD and (1) the spoke radiologist; and (2) independent adjudicators, respectively, were: identification of intracranial hemorrhage 1.0 (0.92–1.0), 1.0 (0.93–1.0), neoplasm 1.0 (0.92–1.0), 1.0 (0.93–1.0), any radiological contraindication to thrombolysis 1.0 (0.92–1.0), 0.85 (0.65–1.0), early ischemic changes 0.62 (0.28–0.96), 0.58 (0.30–0.86), and hyperdense artery sign 0.40 (0.01–0.80), 0.44 (0.06–0.81). Conclusions— CT head interpretations of telestroke network patients by vascular neurologists using ResolutionMD on Smartphones were in excellent agreement with interpretations by spoke radiologists using a Picture Archiving and Communications System and those of independent telestroke adjudicators using a desktop viewer. Clinical Trial Registration Information— www.clinicaltrials.gov unique identifier NCT00829361.

Despite the growing demand for emergency neurological evaluations and neurohospitalists, the supply of neurologists remains relatively fixed over time. Telemedicine is a unique tool that has the ability to put a medical specialist like a neurologist in 2 places in a relatively short period of time, expanding expertise in many rural and in some underserved urban facilities that would ordinarily be devoid of such expertise. Teleneurology is a branch of telemedicine that consults and practices through remote neurological evaluation. Telestroke is defined as remote stroke evaluation. The demand for timely neurological evaluation, especially acute stroke evaluation and treatment with intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (IV rtPA), continues to fuel the growth of neurohospitalists, telestroke, and teleneurology services. Remote, rural, or underserved urban emergency departments and hospitals which are unable to successfully recruit a neurologist or neurohospitalist to provide this service are uniquely suited to a teleneurology option. The number of private practices and academic centers providing telestroke services has grown significantly in the past decade with continued growth expected. We describe the benefits and drawbacks of teleneurology/telestroke, as well as other practical aspects for the teleneurohospitalist.