Cargando…

A scoping review of foot and ankle telemedicine guidelines

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The COVID‐19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine in general. Its use has been widely adopted in the healthcare sector, but relatively little research has been conducted on the use of telemedicine for podiatry. This review aimed to explore and compare existing guide...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stojmanovski Mercieca, Lisa Ann, Formosa, Cynthia, Chockalingam, Nachiappan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9860371/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36698701
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hsr2.1076
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The COVID‐19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine in general. Its use has been widely adopted in the healthcare sector, but relatively little research has been conducted on the use of telemedicine for podiatry. This review aimed to explore and compare existing guidelines on telemedicine related to foot and ankle pathologies within a primary care setting. METHODS: The preferred reporting guidelines for the extension of scoping reviews were used in this review, and a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed and implemented. This study made use of both databases and gray literature searches. Between 2012 and 2022, these databases were searched using various subject headings and free‐text terms for the keywords “telemedicine” “foot health” and “guidelines” with appropriate Boolean operators. RESULTS: The search yielded 356 articles, which were reduced to 283 after removing duplicates. Six more records were discovered through a Google and Google Scholar search and one through an article reference search. Six articles and three institutional practice guidelines were selected for synthesis after screening. The findings were classified according to the level of evidence and research quality, the function of telemedicine and the communication used, the research outcomes sought, and the type of recommendations and guidelines made available. CONCLUSION: This review highlights the lack of podiatric telemedicine guidelines for foot and ankle pathologies. Although foot and ankle guidelines for orthopedic and musculoskeletal virtual consultations have been mentioned, they do not cover the full range of potential case scenarios that fall within the remit of podiatric consultations in a primary care setting. This review suggests the development of foot and ankle telemedicine guidelines with recommendations on how they can better provide accessible care to their patients, making foot and ankle care management not only a hand‐on‐one but also reachable virtually, where applicable.