Retrospective study evaluating telehealth antenatal anesthesia consults for high-risk obstetric patients

Abstract

Background Telehealth has gained popularity, particularly in the COVID-19 era. The use of telehealth is now being applied to preoperative evaluation clinics in an effort to overcome barriers to antenatal anesthesia assessment of high-risk obstetrical patients. Objectives The objective of this study is to determine if the quality of antenatal anesthesia telehealth consults of high-risk obstetric patients is comparable to in-person encounters. This is determined by assessing if telehealth consults are feasible and meet the standards of care, as well as the level of patient satisfaction and ease of use as reported by providers. Study design This retrospective study assessed patients prior to delivery who completed a video-telehealth anesthesia consultation (51 cases) from November 1st, 2019 to November 30th, 2020 and all of those for patients receiving an in-person anesthesia consultation (171 controls) from November 2017 through October 2019. Our primary hypothesis was that telehealth and in-person consultations would not result in different standards of care. The primary outcome was an indicator of meeting the standard of care, and the difference in proportions between the telehealth and in-person consultation was tested by Fisher's exact test. Our secondary hypotheses were that patients reported high levels of satisfaction and could use telehealth easily and providers could use the platform easily. Secondary outcomes were assessed by using the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) and the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) surveys, respectively. Results For the primary outcome, 94.1% (48/51) of telehealth and 89.5% (153/171) of in-person visits met the standard of care, indicating no significant difference between groups (p-value = .4204). The CARE score was 46 [41,50] {median [interquartile range]}, (p-value < .0001), indicating patient satisfaction with telehealth. The use-average scores on the TUQ for the patient and provider were 6.67 [6.33, 7] and 6 [5.33, 7] respectively, indicating great system usability. Conclusion This study demonstrates no significant difference in the standard of care between in-person and telehealth visits. Furthermore, telehealth consultation was feasible and associated with high patient satisfaction and platform usability. Preoperative consultation of high-risk obstetric patients using telehealth visits should be routinely considered in clinical practice. Condensation: There is no significant difference in the standard of care between in-person and telehealth antenatal anesthesia consultations, and patients report high satisfaction and platform usability. Telehealth is gaining popularity, but its role in antenatal anesthesia consultation of high risk obstetrical patients has not yet been defined with respect to standard of care, patient satisfaction, and platform usability. There was no significant difference in standard of care between in-person and telehealth antenatal anesthesia consultations, and patients reported high satisfaction and platform usability. Telehealth should be considered as an alternative to in-person antenatal anesthesia consultation of high risk obstetrical patients. It is a particularly attractive alternative to in-person consultation due to cost-savings, increased patient accessibility, and ease of use.