Resident Perceptions of a Teleneurology Curriculum (P8-2.006)

Abstract

<h3>Objective:</h3> To evaluate resident perceptions of a longitudinal teleneurology curriculum. <h3>Background:</h3> Thirty residents (post-graduate year two through four) participated in a novel year-long teleneurology curriculum, including lectures, interactive workshops, online modules, and level-specific simulated cases with standardized patients. <h3>Design/Methods:</h3> We administered an anonymous Qualtrics survey to participating residents at curriculum initiation and completion, assessing their perspectives on teleneurology education. <h3>Results:</h3> Ten residents completed the initial and 13 completed the follow-up survey (response rate 30% and 43%, respectively). Compared to prior, after the curriculum residents perceived lectures and informal attending feedback less useful (70% to 23%, and 90% to 77%, respectively). Online modules and simulated cases were perceived equally as useful (30% to 23% and 40% to 46%, respectively) before and after the curriculum, although formal clinical attending evaluations associated with simulations were perceived more useful (50% to 61%). Respondents also shifted in self-perception of teleneurology knowledge ability, from not at all/slightly knowledgeable to moderately/extremely knowledgeable, particularly regarding medico-legal issues (40% to 51%), ethics (50% to 69%), infrastructure (40% to 61%), and billing (20% to 38%), however not selection of appropriate patient conditions for teleneurology (70% to 69%). Respondents had no overall change in self-perceived confidence in teleneurology clinical competencies after the curriculum, including technology use (90% to 92%), telepresence and rapport (100% to 92%), examination, diagnosis, and triage (overall, 93% to 91%), and efficiency (80% to 77%). They were less confident in educating patients on teleneurology encounter set-up (80% to 69%), and more so in documentation (80% to 93%) and collaborating remotely with medical teams (50% to 61%). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> Although limited by sample size and survey response rate, our findings have guided educational content and delivery, and allocation of faculty efforts and workflow, in a subsequent teleneurology curriculum iteration. Similar multi-center curricular evaluation may suggest necessary updates in residency milestones inclusive of teleneurology knowledge and skills. <b>Disclosure:</b> The institution of Dr. Chandra has received research support from American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology Faculty Innovation in Education Award. Dr. Zha has nothing to disclose. Dr. Samudralwar has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Sanofi Genzyme. Dr. Samudralwar has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Biogen. Dr. Samudralwar has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for EMD Serono. Dr. Bozorgui has nothing to disclose. Miss Deal has nothing to disclose. Mrs. Betner has nothing to disclose. Dr. Jagolino-Cole has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for American Academy of Neurology - Neurology Clinical Practice Journal. . The institution of Dr. Jagolino-Cole has received research support from McGovern Medical School at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.