Parent Experience and Cost Savings Associated With a Novel Tele-physiatry Program for Children Living in Rural and Underserved Communities.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate parent and therapist experience and cost savings from the payer perspective associated with a novel tele-physiatry program for children living in rural and underserved communities. DESIGN: We designed a noninferiority, cluster-randomized crossover study at 4 school-based clinics to evaluate parent experience and perceived quality of care between a telemedicine-based approach in which the physiatrist conducts the visit remotely with an in-person therapist and a traditional in-person physiatrist clinic. SETTING: Four school-based clinics in Northern California. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 268 encounters (124 telemedicine and 144 in-person) were completed by 200 unique patients (N=200). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Parent and therapist experience scores. RESULTS: For parents and therapists, experience and perceived quality of care were high with no significant differences between telemedicine and in-person encounters. For parents whose children received a telemedicine encounter, 40 (54.8%) reported no preference for their child's subsequent encounter, 21 (28.8%) preferred a physiatrist telemedicine visit, and 12 (16.4%) preferred a physiatrist in-person visit. From the payer perspective, costs were $100 higher for in-person clinics owing to physician mileage reimbursement. CONCLUSIONS: We found that school-based tele-physiatry for children with special health care needs is not inferior to in-person encounters with regard to parent and provider experience and perceived quality of care. Tele-physiatry was also associated with an average cost savings of $100 per clinic to the payer.

Evaluation of the graded redefined assessment of strength, sensibility and prehension (GRASSP) in children with tetraplegia.

STUDY DESIGN: Psychometric study. OBJECTIVE: To validate the GRASSP in pediatric SCI populations and establish the lower age of test administration. SETTING: United States: Pennsylvania, Maryland, Illinois, Michigan, California, Texas. METHODS: Mean, SD and range of scores were calculated and examined for known-group differences. Test-retest reliability was measured by the intra-class correlation, concurrent validity of the GRASSP against the SCIM, SCIM-SS, and the CUE-Q was measured by the Spearman correlation. RESULTS: GRASSP scores differed between participants with motor complete and incomplete injuries (p = <0.0001-0.036). Test-retest reliability was strong (ICC = 0.99). Weak correlation with the total SCIM (r = 0.33-0.66), and moderate to strong correlation with the SCIM-SC (r = 37-0.70) and CUE-Q (r = 0.40-0.84). CONCLUSION: Results support the validity of the GRASSP and provide evidence that the scores are reliable when administered to children. The GRASSP sensory and strength subtests are recommended for children beginning at 6 years of age, and the GRASSP prehension performance/ability subtest for children beginning at 8 years of age. Normative data are needed for the performance components of the GRASSP.