An evaluation of telemedicine in surgery: telediagnosis compared with direct diagnosis.

HYPOTHESIS Telemedicine for real-time transmission of clinical documents and interactive remote telediagnosis allows accurate clinical application in surgery. DESIGN Prospective cohort study in which 2 hospitals, 120 miles apart, were connected via integrated services digital network (ISDN) teleconferencing units, and each evaluated clinical cases in real time. SETTING A tertiary care university hospital and primary care county hospital. PARTICIPANTS Between May 1, 1998, and June 30, 1998, 112 patients undergoing digestive or endocrine surgery were evaluated by teletransmission (study group) and direct vision (control group). Diagnosis had to be known by the viewer, and either conventional magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomographic scans were available. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Picture quality, organ structure, and pathologic finding viewed on telemedicine documents were evaluated by radiologists and surgeons blind to diagnosis. Accuracy of remote 128-kilobit (kb)/s transmission-rate diagnoses and results were compared with those obtained directly. RESULTS Picture quality was "good" or "excellent" in 92.9% of transmitted documents and 95.5% of live images (P>.4). The target organ was always recognized, structure and pathologic finding were analyzable in 98.2% of transmitted documents and 99.1% of live documents, and fine structures were assessable in 89.3% of transmitted pictures and 95.5% of live pictures (P>.05). Diagnosis was made in 84.8% of transmitted cases and 93.8% of live cases (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS Low bandwidth (128 kb/s) telemedicine application in surgery is reliable in evaluating remote cases. Loss of image quality through teletransmission occurred in 2.7% of cases, and diagnosis was not possible in 15.2% of transmitted vs 6.2% of live cases, suggesting factors other than technical quality (choice of radiological studies, additional clinical information required, etc). This underscores the importance of real-time interactive discussion during surgical teleconferences.

[1]  A Allen,et al.  Technical and clinical progress in telemedicine. , 1999, JAMA.

[2]  N. Demartines,et al.  Assessment of telemedicine in surgical education and patient care. , 2000, Annals of surgery.

[3]  J. Kvedar,et al.  Telemedicine in vascular surgery: feasibility of digital imaging for remote management of wounds. , 1998, Journal of vascular surgery.

[4]  William F. Mason,et al.  Telemedicine in Nova Scotia: report of a pilot study. , 1998, Telemedicine journal : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[5]  T. Bergmo,et al.  An economic analysis of teleconsultation in otorhinolaryngology , 1997, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[6]  T. Krummel.  Surgical simulation and virtual reality: the coming revolution. , 1998, Annals of surgery.

[7]  E G Tangalos,et al.  Use of the new media for medical education , 1997, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[8]  D Magid,et al.  Subtle orthopedic fractures: teleradiology workstation versus film interpretation. , 1993, Radiology.

[9]  T J Walters,et al.  Deployment telemedicine: the Walter Reed Army Medical Center experience. , 1996, Military medicine.

[10]  A. Bhattacharyya,et al.  Case triage model for the practice of telepathology. , 1995, Telemedicine journal : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[11]  F D Malone,et al.  Effect of ISDN bandwidth on image quality for telemedicine transmission of obstetric ultrasonography. , 1998, Telemedicine journal : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[12]  Télémédecine et responsabilité médicale. , 1995 .

[13]  P G Schulam,et al.  Telesurgical mentoring. Initial clinical experience. , 1998, Surgical endoscopy.

[14]  P. Taylor,et al.  A survey of research in telemedicine. 2: Telemedicine services , 1998, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[15]  J L Nitzkin,et al.  Reliability of telemedicine examination. , 1997, Telemedicine journal : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[16]  Endoscopic surgery teleconferencing. , 1996, International surgery.

[17]  Kenneth Mandl,et al.  Electronic Patient-Physician Communication: Problems and Promise , 1998, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[18]  C Levenback.  Should we accept mediocrity? , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  Teleradiology: experiences with magnetic resonance imaging using this new technology. , 1998, The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association.

[20]  G. Lundberg,et al.  A comparison of the opinions of experts and readers as to what topics a general medical journal (JAMA) should address. , 1998, JAMA.

[21]  K S Berbaum,et al.  Subspecialty radiology consultation by interactive telemedicine , 1996, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[22]  M Smithwick.  Network options for wide-area telesurgery. , 1995, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[23]  M Loane,et al.  Can x rays be accurately interpreted using a low cost telemedicine system? , 1998, Journal of accident & emergency medicine.

[24]  F. Allaert,et al.  [Telemedicine and medical responsibility]. , 1995, Archives d'anatomie et de cytologie pathologiques.

[25]  P T Dick,et al.  Participant satisfaction and comfort with multidisciplinary pediatric telemedicine consultations. , 1999, Journal of pediatric surgery.

[26]  Louis R. Kavoussi,et al.  A novel method of surgical instruction: international telementoring , 1998, World Journal of Urology.

[27]  P. Taylor,et al.  A survey of research in telemedicine. 1: Telemedicine systems , 1998, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[28]  G. Boland,et al.  Teleradiology: another revolution in radiology? , 1998, Clinical radiology.

[29]  J. Martel,et al.  Accuracy of Teleradiology in Skeletal Disorders: Solitary Bone Lesions and Fractures , 1995, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[30]  J. Lesher,et al.  Telemedicine evaluation of cutaneous diseases: a blinded comparative study. , 1998, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.