Do diagnoses, surgical plans, and outcomes vary for telemedicine patients seeking spine care? Not much, says a new study from Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) in New York. The new retrospective cohort study, “Telemedicine Visits Can Generate Highly Accurate Diagnoses and Surgical Plans for Spine Patients,” appears in the September 1, 2022, edition of Spine.
Spine Patients Thriving With Preop Telemedicine?
Todd J. Albert, M.D., Surgeon in Chief Emeritus and the Richard R Rogers Chair to Advance Spine Care at Hospital for Special Surgery and co-author, told OTW, “Virtual visits have improved patient access and ease of appointments for the patient (and treating physician) from disparate geographies, assuming compliance with regulations. The ability to access an HSS physician has improved for patients. At minimum an initial visit with plan can be formulated. If further interventions/surgery are needed, efficient in-person evaluation and procedures can be effectuated.”
The researchers looked at the records of 166 patients (101 patients who had a new patient telemedicine visit before surgery and 65 who had a telemedicine visit followed by an in-person evaluation). They found no differences in the rate of case cancellations before surgery and patient-reported outcome measures between these two groups.
Regarding the 65 patients who had both a telemedicine followed by an in-person visit, the diagnosis was unchanged for 61 patients (94%) and the surgical plan remained the same for 52 patients (80%). For those whose surgical plan was changed, the most common reason was updated findings on new imaging—10 patients, (77%).
Co-author Sheeraz Qureshi, M.D., M.B.A. explained to OTW, “With all of the challenges that have occurred in our personal and professional lives as a result of the pandemic, one of the real silver linings has been the increased adoption by physicians and patients of telemedicine.”
“Specifically in spine surgery, telemedicine has allowed surgeons to meet a patient, obtain an accurate history, perform a basic physical examination, review relevant imaging, and develop a treatment plan without the patient having had to sit and wait in a waiting room. In our practices, the outcomes have been excellent, patient satisfaction has been high, and we have been able to broaden access!”

Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.