POS1570-PARE A PATIENT-LED SURVEY INTO THE BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS OF TELEMEDICINE APPOINTMENTS FOR ASSESSING CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE WITH RHEUMATIC CONDITIONS: COMPARING EUROPEAN AND CANADIAN COHORTS

Abstract

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic, some provision of healthcare shifted to remote, technology-assisted appointments (telemedicine). Whilst parents/carers of children and young people with rheumatic conditions have reported benefits of telemedicine, concerns remain.ObjectivesThis patient and parent-led project sought to understand the views of parents/carers about telemedicine, identifying the benefits and limitations of remote technology-assisted appointments, and comparing views between Canadian and European cohorts.MethodsAn online survey was developed, translated into multiple languages and shared via social media and patient organisations, targeted at parents of children and young people with rheumatic, autoimmune and autoinflammatory conditions. Fieldwork took place in April 2021 in Europe and May 2021 in Canada. Consent was provided during enrollment.ResultsA total of 290 responses were received (133 Europe; 157 Canada). Of these, 73% were female, median age 12.Over half of respondents (53%) in Europe reported travelling over an hour to in-person appointments with their paediatric rheumatologist, compared to a significantly higher proportion of respondents in Canada (87%). Consequently, in-person appointments represent a greater time burden amongst Canadian caregivers, though both groups report appointments taking over three hours in total (51% Europe, 69% Canada).Prior to COVID-19, most had never had a telemedicine appointment (92% Europe, 95% Canada). Since March 2020, the majority (71% Europe, 82% Canada) had at least one telemedicine appointment.Table 1.Shows the scores (1 worst, 5 best) given by parents about their telemedicine experience. Overall, most aspects scored positively (p<.05). However, parents felt telemedicine was not as good as in-person appointments.EuropeCanadaPEasy to schedule3.50 (3.18, 3.82) *4.33 (4.14, 4.52) *† † † † † † † † † † †On time3.22 (2.89, 3.55)4.07 (3.85, 4.28) *Enough time with doctor3.51 (3.19, 3.83) *4.24 (4.02, 4.45) *As good as in-person visit2.21 (1.96, 2.46) **2.66 (2.42, 2.90) **Easier to see doctor2.84 (2.55, 3.13)3.51 (3.25, 3.77) *Easy to sign-in3.52 (3.22, 3.82) *4.25 (4.06, 4.43) *Quality of video3.23 (2.93, 3.53)3.87 (3.66, 4.07) *Quality of sound3.54 (3.26, 3.81) *3.94 (3.75, 4.14) *Able to speak freely3.61 (3.34, 3.88) *4.05 (3.85, 4.24) *Able to understand doctor3.61 (3.32, 3.90) *4.09 (3.90, 4.28) *Quality of care provided3.43 (3.12, 3.73) *3.78 (3.56, 4.00) *Overall telemedicine experience3.23 (2.91, 3.55)3.78 (3.57, 3.99) *Table 1. Mean scores for a range of aspects of telemedicine (1-worst; 5-best). * Positive score (p<.05) ** Negative score (p<.05) † Difference between Canadian and European cohorts is statistically significant (p<.05), chi-square.When asked about aspects of telemedicine, a greater proportion of respondents from Canada answered favourably compared to those from Europe with the majority reporting telemedicine appointments had saved them time, enabled them to have an appointment and that it made the appointment safer. However, most felt that their consultant could not properly assess their child (72% Europe, 78% Canada, P<.05).Overall respondents said they would prefer the next appointment to be in-person (82% Europe, 62% Canada, p<.05), although 31% from Canada were amenable to a combination of in-person and telemedicine-based care.ConclusionThere are advantages to telemedicine, notably saving time and making appointments accessible. Families from Canada tended to view telemedicine more favourably than those from Europe, although the majority from both cohorts reported concerns about the ability to assess their child. There may be value in providing training to parents to enhance the accuracy of home-based assessments, particularly when the disease is stable. However, parents continue to report the value of in-person appointments.Disclosure of InterestsRichard Beesley: None declared, Saskya Angevare Grant/research support from: Novartis and Sobi grant for translation of KAISZ website. None relevant to this study., Jennifer Wilson Grant/research support from: Abbvie, Amgen and Sobi for Virtual Patient Education Programs. None relevant to this study., Wendy Costello: None declared