TY - JOUR
T1 - Telerheumatology
T2 - Before, during, and after a global pandemic
AU - Matsumoto, Rachel A.
AU - Barton, Jennifer L.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/5/1
Y1 - 2021/5/1
N2 - Purpose of reviewIn early 2020, the COVID-19 global pandemic shifted most healthcare to remote delivery methods to protect patients, clinicians, and hospital staff. Such remote care delivery methods include the use of telehealth technologies including clinical video telehealth or telephone visits. Prior to this, research on the acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy of telehealth applied to rheumatology, or telerheumatology, has been limited.Recent findingsTelerheumatology visits were found to be noninferior to in-person visits and are often more time and cost effective for patients. Clinicians and patients both noted the lack of a physical exam in telehealth visits and patients missed the opportunity to have lab work done or other diagnostic tests they are afforded with in-person visits. Overall, patients and clinicians had positive attitudes toward the use of telerheumatology and agreed on its usefulness, even beyond the pandemic.SummaryAlthough telerheumatology has the potential to expand the reach of rheumatology practice, some of the most vulnerable patients still lack the most basic resources required for a telehealth visit. As the literature on telerheumatology continues to expand, attention should be paid to health equity, the digital divide, as well as patient preferences in order to foster true shared decision-making over telehealth.
AB - Purpose of reviewIn early 2020, the COVID-19 global pandemic shifted most healthcare to remote delivery methods to protect patients, clinicians, and hospital staff. Such remote care delivery methods include the use of telehealth technologies including clinical video telehealth or telephone visits. Prior to this, research on the acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy of telehealth applied to rheumatology, or telerheumatology, has been limited.Recent findingsTelerheumatology visits were found to be noninferior to in-person visits and are often more time and cost effective for patients. Clinicians and patients both noted the lack of a physical exam in telehealth visits and patients missed the opportunity to have lab work done or other diagnostic tests they are afforded with in-person visits. Overall, patients and clinicians had positive attitudes toward the use of telerheumatology and agreed on its usefulness, even beyond the pandemic.SummaryAlthough telerheumatology has the potential to expand the reach of rheumatology practice, some of the most vulnerable patients still lack the most basic resources required for a telehealth visit. As the literature on telerheumatology continues to expand, attention should be paid to health equity, the digital divide, as well as patient preferences in order to foster true shared decision-making over telehealth.
KW - COVID-19
KW - rheumatoid arthritis
KW - telehealth
KW - telerheumatology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85103607186&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85103607186&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000790
DO - 10.1097/BOR.0000000000000790
M3 - Review article
C2 - 33741808
AN - SCOPUS:85103607186
SN - 1040-8711
VL - 33
SP - 262
EP - 269
JO - Current opinion in rheumatology
JF - Current opinion in rheumatology
IS - 3
ER -