Telemedicine as a Therapeutic Option in Sports Medicine: Results of a Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study among Physicians and Patients in Germany.
COVID-19
digitalization
eHealth
health services research
sports medicine
telemedicine
telemedicine in sports medicine
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 07 2021
02 07 2021
Historique:
received:
17
06
2021
revised:
30
06
2021
accepted:
01
07
2021
entrez:
20
7
2021
pubmed:
21
7
2021
medline:
23
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Worldwide, the number of treatments in the field of sports medicine is increasing. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has changed everyday life. Many consultations had to be cancelled, postponed, or converted to a virtual format. Telemedicine in sports medicine could support physicians. This study analyzes the use and perception of telemedicine applications among physicians and patients in the field of sports medicine in Germany. This prospective cross-sectional study was based on a survey of sports medicine physicians and patients in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistics were calculated. We analyzed the responses of 729 patients and 702 sports medicine physicians. Most believed that telemedicine is useful. Both physicians and patients rated their knowledge of telemedicine as unsatisfactory. The majority of respondents said they do not currently use telemedicine but would like to do so. Patients and physicians reported that their attitude had changed positively towards telemedicine and that their usage had increased due to COVID-19. The majority in both groups agreed on implementing virtual visits in stable disease conditions. Telemedicine was considered helpful for follow-up monitoring and prevention by both groups. Telemedicine in sports medicine has seen limited use but is highly accepted among physicians and patients alike. The absence of a structured framework is an obstacle to effective implementation. Training courses should be introduced to improve the limited knowledge regarding the use of telemedicine. More research in telemedicine in sports medicine is needed. This includes large-scale randomized controlled trials, economic analyses and explorations of user preferences.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Worldwide, the number of treatments in the field of sports medicine is increasing. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has changed everyday life. Many consultations had to be cancelled, postponed, or converted to a virtual format. Telemedicine in sports medicine could support physicians. This study analyzes the use and perception of telemedicine applications among physicians and patients in the field of sports medicine in Germany.
METHODS
This prospective cross-sectional study was based on a survey of sports medicine physicians and patients in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic. Descriptive statistics were calculated.
RESULTS
We analyzed the responses of 729 patients and 702 sports medicine physicians. Most believed that telemedicine is useful. Both physicians and patients rated their knowledge of telemedicine as unsatisfactory. The majority of respondents said they do not currently use telemedicine but would like to do so. Patients and physicians reported that their attitude had changed positively towards telemedicine and that their usage had increased due to COVID-19. The majority in both groups agreed on implementing virtual visits in stable disease conditions. Telemedicine was considered helpful for follow-up monitoring and prevention by both groups.
CONCLUSION
Telemedicine in sports medicine has seen limited use but is highly accepted among physicians and patients alike. The absence of a structured framework is an obstacle to effective implementation. Training courses should be introduced to improve the limited knowledge regarding the use of telemedicine. More research in telemedicine in sports medicine is needed. This includes large-scale randomized controlled trials, economic analyses and explorations of user preferences.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34281045
pii: ijerph18137110
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18137110
pmc: PMC8297228
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Int J Med Educ. 2020 Apr 20;11:83-89
pubmed: 32311676
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2000 Oct;5(4):219-21
pubmed: 11184958
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Aug 05;7(8):e14991
pubmed: 31381501
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Aug 24;17(1):362
pubmed: 27553253
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2020 Jun;47(2):215-225
pubmed: 32451013
Arthroscopy. 2021 Feb;37(2):521-527
pubmed: 33022366
J Adv Nurs. 2000 Oct;32(4):1008-15
pubmed: 11095242
RMD Open. 2021 Feb;7(1):
pubmed: 33622673
Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2020 Sep;16(9):525-535
pubmed: 32709998
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Jun 26;15(6):e122
pubmed: 23803299
Br J Sports Med. 2021 Jan;55(2):118-122
pubmed: 32816788
J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2021 Feb;47(2):476-485
pubmed: 33084213
Telemed J E Health. 2005 Feb;11(1):102-5
pubmed: 15785228
J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Jan;58(1):103-5
pubmed: 15649678
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Jan 23;20(1):e24
pubmed: 29362206
Maturitas. 2018 Jul;113:48-52
pubmed: 29903648
PLoS One. 2020 Nov 9;15(11):e0242124
pubmed: 33166369
Nature. 2021 Feb;590(7844):134-139
pubmed: 33348340
PLoS One. 2014 Oct 14;9(10):e108441
pubmed: 25313672
Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2016 Dec;46(3):380-385
pubmed: 27395561
BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 1;9(8):e027743
pubmed: 31375610
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jun 2;22(6):e19361
pubmed: 32452816
Support Care Cancer. 2021 May;29(5):2631-2638
pubmed: 32968861
J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 Jul 31;13(1):190
pubmed: 30064451
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 May 15;8(5):e17507
pubmed: 32348258
Digit Health. 2019 Feb 06;5:2055207619828220
pubmed: 30792878
Minerva Stomatol. 2020 Aug;69(4):251-255
pubmed: 32945634
Neurol Sci. 2020 Aug;41(8):1977-1979
pubmed: 32556746