scholarly journals AB209. SOH21AS011. Rapid implementation of virtual hand therapy clinics due to COVID-19-report and early evaluation of functional outcomes and patient satisfaction

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. AB209-AB209
Author(s):  
Charles Timon ◽  
Brian O’Ceallaigh ◽  
Edel Siney ◽  
Niall McInerney
2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_6) ◽  
Author(s):  
C Timon ◽  
B O'Ceallaigh ◽  
E Siney ◽  
N McInerney

Abstract Aim The COVID-19 pandemic led to the introduction of movement restrictions and the concept of social distancing in Ireland, beginning suddenly on March 12th 2020 (1). Following this, virtual consultation via video-call have been identified and integrated as an alternative to in-person consultation. To follow national recommendations and reduce the risk of patient attendance, video consultations were rapidly integrated by the hand therapy team at University Hospital Galway. This service provides a service to 730,513 people across eight counties (2) and was utilised for a range of upper limb injuries, providing vital care to trauma patients post-operatively and to minor injury cases. We wanted to retrospectively assess the implementation of these virtual clinics and how it affected patients. Method Patients were offered virtual hand therapy appointments. Patients were sent a link with their virtual appointment time and date via email. The patient could accept or decline the option of a virtual appointment at this stage. Patient satisfaction was measured via a bespoke survey. Functional outcomes were assessed via the QuickDASH assessment tool (3). Results 44/74 ( 59.5%) of patients responded to the survey. Subjectively, the vast found the service user-friendly, convenient and beneficial. Objectively, the QuickDash score demonstrated low disability and high upper limb function return post injury. Conclusions Implementation of virtual hand therapy was integrated into practise without major issues. Patient satisfaction was very high. Virtual health services have obvious economic and environmental benefits and are essential to providing safe patient care in a social distancing society.


2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (10) ◽  
pp. 2412-2419
Author(s):  
Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla ◽  
Francisco A. Miralles-Muñoz ◽  
Santiago Gonzalez-Parreño ◽  
Fernando A. Lopez-Prats

Background: There is controversy about the benefit of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) for degenerative lesions in middle-aged patients. Purpose: To compare satisfaction with APM between middle-aged patients with no or mild knee osteoarthritis (OA) and a degenerative meniscal tear and those with a traumatic tear. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A comparative prospective study at 5 years of middle-aged patients (45-60 years old) with no or mild OA undergoing APM for degenerative (n = 115) or traumatic (n = 143) tears was conducted. Patient satisfaction was measured by a 5-point Likert scale and functional outcomes by the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to identify factors correlating with patient-reported satisfaction at 5 years postoperatively. Results: Baseline patient characteristics were not different between groups. At the 5-year evaluation, the satisfaction rate in the traumatic and degenerative groups was 68.5% versus 71.3%, respectively ( P = .365). Patient satisfaction was significantly associated with functional outcomes ( r = 0.69; P = .024). In the degenerative group, 43 patients (37.4%) had OA progression to Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade 2 or 3, but only 24 patients (20.8%) had a symptomatic knee at final follow-up. Multivariate regression analysis for patient dissatisfaction at 5-year follow-up showed the following significant independent factors: female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.6 [95% CI, 1.1-2.3]; P = .018), body mass index >30 kg/m2 (OR, 2.6 [95% CI, 1.7-4.9]; P = .035), lateral meniscal tears (OR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.1-0.9]; P = .039), and OA progression to K-L grade ≥2 at final follow-up (OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.2-2.6]; P = .014). At the final evaluation, there were no significant differences between groups in pain scores ( P = .648), WOMAC scores ( P = .083), or KOOS-4 scores ( P = .187). Likewise, there were no significant differences in the KOOS subscores for Pain ( P = .144), Symptoms ( P = .097), or Sports/Recreation ( P = .150). Although the degenerative group had significantly higher subscores for Activities of Daily Living ( P = .001) and Quality of Life ( P = .004), the differences were considered not clinically meaningful. Conclusion: There were no meaningful differences in patient satisfaction or clinical outcomes between patients with traumatic and degenerative tears and no or mild OA. Predictors of dissatisfaction with APM were female sex, obesity, and lateral meniscal tears. Our findings suggested that APM was an effective medium-term option to relieve pain and recover function in middle-aged patients with degenerative meniscal tears, without obvious OA, and with failed prior physical therapy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryce W Polascik ◽  
Hamid Rahmatullah Bin Abd Razak ◽  
Hwei-Chi Chong ◽  
Ngai-Nung Lo ◽  
Seng-Jin Yeo

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 212-212
Author(s):  
Douglas J. Matthews ◽  
Fahad Siddique Hossain ◽  
Shelain Patel ◽  
Fares S. Haddad

Orthopedics ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. e850-e856 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Peter W. van Jonbergen ◽  
Ashvin V. Boeddha ◽  
Jos J. A. M van Raaij

2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 771-778 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. HARTH ◽  
G. GERMANN ◽  
A. JESTER

This study evaluated the effectiveness of a patient-oriented, hand rehabilitation programme compared to a standard programme regarding functional outcomes, return to work, patient satisfaction and costs. Patients were recruited in two consecutive cohorts. One cohort received the standard treatment programme ( n = 75) and the other a programme based on principles of patient orientation ( n = 75). Data were collected at the beginning and end of rehabilitation and 6 months after discharge. Clinical variables included range of motion, grip and pinch strength. Self-reported measures included pain, upper extremity functioning, health status, satisfaction and job situation. Analysis of variance for repeated measurements was used to calculate the main effects. The patient-oriented group showed more favourable results with respect to DASH scores ( P <.05), pain ( P <.001) and patient satisfaction ( P <.0001). More patients returned to their former jobs and time off sick was reduced. We concluded that the patient-oriented approach was more effective and cost-saving.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document