Figure - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Background and Aims
The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 presented an unprecedented challenge to urological service globally. In many countries, outpatient clinics were cancelled, and the use of telemedicine visits was increased. For urological complaints, the need to perform a sensitive clinical examination via telemedicine posed an unfamiliar e...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... For instance, a center in the United Kingdom found that the use of telemedicine for real-time remote consultations combined with clinical risk stratification enabled 86% of oncological and 91% of benign urological outpatient activities to be carried out. 6 There are various means of utilising telemedicine to aid patients - Table 2 highlights some examples. 7 Telemedicine offers several key benefits for patients with urological presentations. ...Citations
Purpose
The purpose of this white paper is to educate health care professionals about the evolution of telemedicine (TM) and to propose a hybrid model that leverages the strengths of traditional in-person medicine as well as virtual medicine while maximizing the safety and quality of men’s sexual health care.
Literature Search Strategy
A literature search focused on the use of TM in urology and men’s health was performed through PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science (January 1, 2012–April 26, 2022). Keywords included all known permutations of the terminology used to refer to virtual health, care as well as the terminology used to refer to urologic diseases, issues specific to men’s health, and men’s sexual health concerns. Publications that emerged after the literature search that met this criterion also were incorporated. Opinion pieces, letters to the editor, meeting abstracts, and conference proceedings were excluded. Additional resources were retrieved, such as governmental technical reports, legislative updates and reviews, and blogs. This search strategy yielded 1684 records across databases after removal of duplicates. Abstracts from the retrieved records were reviewed for relevance. Relevant publications were defined as those that reported data on any aspect of TM use specific to urology, men’s health, and/or men’s sexual health. If relevance was unclear from the abstract, then the full text of the article was retrieved for a more detailed review. In addition, the published evidence-based practice guidelines relevant to care for erectile dysfunction, Peyronie’s disease, ejaculatory dysfunction, and hypogonadism were retrieved. The most common reasons for article exclusions were a focus on TM use in disciplines other than urology and the absence of data (ie, opinion pieces). After exclusions, a total of 91 publications remained and constituted the evidence base for this paper.
Introduction:
Patients with penile conditions comprise a significant proportion of any pediatric urology practice, and physical examination is the mainstay of diagnosis for such conditions. While the rapid adoption of telemedicine (TM) facilitated access to pediatric urology care during the pandemic, the accuracy of TM-based diagnosis for pediatric penile anatomy and pathology has not been studied. Our aim was to characterize the diagnostic accuracy of TM-based evaluation of pediatric penile conditions by comparing diagnosis during the initial virtual visit (VV) with a subsequent in-person visit (IPV). We also sought to assess the agreement between scheduled and actual surgical procedure performed.
Methods:
A single-institution prospective database of male patients less than 21 years of age who presented for evaluation of penile conditions between August 2020 and December 2021 was analyzed. Patients were included if they had an IPV with the same pediatric urologist within 12 months of the initial VV. Diagnostic concordance was based on a surgeon-reported survey of specific penile diagnoses, completed at both initial VV and follow-up IPV. Surgical concordance was assessed based on the proposed versus billed CPT code(s).
Results:
Median age among 158 patients was 10.6 months. The most frequent VV diagnoses were penile adhesions (n = 37), phimosis (n = 26), "other" (n = 24), post-circumcision redundancy (n = 18), and buried penis (n = 14). Initial VV and subsequent IPV diagnoses were concordant in 40.5% (64/158); 40/158 (25%) had partial concordance (at least one diagnosis matched). There was no difference in age, race, ethnicity, median time between visits, or device type between patients with concordant vs. discordant diagnoses. Of 102 patients who underwent surgery, 44 had VV only while 58 had IPV prior to surgery. Concordance of scheduled versus actual penile surgery was 90.9% in those patients who only had a VV prior to surgery. Overall, surgery concordance was lower among those with hypospadias repairs vs. non-hypospadias surgery (79.4% vs. 92.6%, p = 0.05).
Conclusion:
Among pediatric patients being evaluated by TM for penile conditions, there was poor agreement between VV-based and IPV-based diagnoses. However, besides hypospadias repairs, agreement between planned and actual surgical procedures performed was high, suggesting that TM-based assessment is generally adequate for surgical planning in this population. These findings leave open the possibility that, among patients not scheduled for surgery or IPV, certain conditions might be misdiagnosed or missed entirely.
Since the COVID‐19 pandemic, telemedicine has provided a lifeline for non‐emergency healthcare provision. However, with its widespread implementation, many clinicians wonder what the litigation considerations might be for telemedicine. This paper reviews the legal cases that have shaped UK clinical negligence legislation and their application to telemedicine. Key considerations for avoiding litigation are also outlined.
