Telemedicine versus face-to-face care for treatment of patients with lower extremity ulcers.

OBJECTIVE: Lower extremity ulcers (LEUs) are associated with a decline in patients' quality of life (QoL). Better healthcare availability in remote regions, facilitated by telemedicine (TM), may improve patient wellbeing. The aim of this study was to compare the QoL of patients treated via synchronous video TM with that of patients treated with standard face-to-face (FTF) care. METHOD: The study was performed in a large health services provider in Israel (Maccabi Healthcare Services). TM was used in four remote locations; the FTF method was applied in two regional clinics. The treatment protocol was performed by a nurse and supervised by the regional physician in both treatment modes. A validated Wound-QoL questionnaire in Hebrew was used to assess patient outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 83 patients were treated via TM and 94 patients were treated FTF. The mean QoL for patients treated via TM was 0.546±0.249 compared with 0.507±0.238 for the FTF group. A similarity relating to outcomes in both treatment methods was demonstrated by a difference of 0.039 (95% confidence interval -0.33-0.111) and p=0.291. The probability of the difference being within the limits of the interval in a replicated study was 83.4%. The equivalence/non-inferiority was established within the accepted Δ=0.12 range. CONCLUSION: The results indicated no reduced QoL for patients with LEUs treated with telemedicine versus with standard FTF care. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Validation of "Wound QoL" Hebrew version disease-specific questionnaire for patients with lower extremity ulcerations.

The slow healing process and high recurrence rate of lower extremity ulcerations (LEU) impose a considerable medical and economic burden and affect quality of life (QoL). Analyses of LEU-related QoL in Israel are limited due to lack of a validated Hebrew disease-specific evaluation instrument. The aim of this study was to validate the disease-specific Hebrew "Wound QoL" questionnaire. The validation of the "Wound QoL" disease-specific instrument, translated from English to Hebrew, was based on a comparison with the valid Hebrew version of the SF12v.2 health-related questionnaire. The convenience sample for the "Wound QoL" validation (n = 32) was obtained from patient populations in the Maccabi Health Services' outpatient clinics at the northern and southern parts of Israel. The study was conducted between June and September 2017. Face/construct validity was accepted by specialists' consensus. Internal consistency assessed by Cronbach's α was .893. Concurrent validity reflected by Pearson's correlations between the tools was in the range of 0.830 to 0.950. The Wound QoL Hebrew version is a valid and reliable instrument suitable for implementation in an Israeli cultural environment.