This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite the dramatic increase in the provision of virtual nephrology care, only anecdotal reports of outcomes without comparators to usual care exist in the literature. This study aimed to provide objective determination of clinical noninferiority of hybrid (telenephrology plus face-to-face) versus standard (face-to-face) inpatient nephrology care. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: telenephrology. Structured surveys were used to understand the perspectives of non-nephrology hospital providers and telenephrologists. RESULTS: =21) were very satisfied (48%) and satisfied (29%) with telenephrology response time and felt telenephrology was as safe as standard care (67%), while providing them enough information to make patient care decisions (76%). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for in-hospital nephrology consults were not significantly different comparing hybrid care versus standard care. Non-nephrology hospital providers and telenephrologists had favorable opinions of telenephrology and most perceived it is as safe and effective as standard care. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2022_04_11_CJN13441021.mp3.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Androga et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: