Telemedicine review in neuro-oncology: comparative experiential analysis for Barrow Neurological Institute and Geisinger Health during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

Abstract Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has grossly affected how we deliver health care and how health care institutions derive value from the care provided. Adapting to new technologies and reimbursement patterns were challenges that had to be met by the institutions while patients struggled with decisions to prioritize concerns and to identify new pathways to care. With the implementation of social distancing practices, telemedicine plays an increasing role in patient care delivery, particularly in the field of neurology. This is of particular concern in our cancer patient population given that these patients are often at increased infectious risk on immunosuppressive therapies and often have mobility limitations. We reviewed telemedicine practices in neurology pre– and post–COVID-19 and evaluated the neuro-oncology clinical practice approaches of 2 large care systems, Barrow Neurological Institute and Geisinger Health. Practice metrics were collected for impact on clinic volumes, institutional recovery techniques, and task force development to address COVID-19 specific issues. Neuro-Oncology divisions reached 67% or more of prepandemic capacity (patient visits and slot utilization) within 3 weeks and returned to 90% or greater capacity within 6 weeks of initial closures due to COVID-19. The 2 health systems rapidly and effectively implemented telehealth practices to recover patient volumes. Although telemedicine will not replace the in-person clinical visit, telemedicine will likely continue to be an integral part of neuro-oncologic care. Telemedicine has potential for expanding access in remote areas and provides a convenient alternative to patients with limited mobility, transportation, or other socioeconomic complexities that otherwise challenge patient visit adherence.