The Experts below are selected from a list of 71436 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Richard Iorio - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P < .0001), but otherwise similar to patients in the EPRA-HHS cohort. EPRA-only patients demonstrated no differences in VR-12 (P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior (P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. Methods We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. Results In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior ( P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. Conclusion The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS.

Roy I. Davidovitch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P < .0001), but otherwise similar to patients in the EPRA-HHS cohort. EPRA-only patients demonstrated no differences in VR-12 (P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior (P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. Methods We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. Results In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior ( P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. Conclusion The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS.

Young Moon Chae - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Patient satisfaction with telemedicine in Home Health Services for the elderly
    International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2001
    Co-Authors: Young Moon Chae, Joo Heon Lee, Hee Ja Kim, Ki Hong Jun, Jong Uk Won
    Abstract:

    Abstract In a pilot study of telemedicine in Home Health Services (HHS) for elderly patients, we implemented and evaluated a telemedicine system with a 33-kbs narrow-band approach to determine its effectiveness in providing quality Services. Fifty patients were selected for the study. We found that telemedicine was effective in terms of reducing the number of clinic visits and achieving patient satisfaction. The average number of clinic visits per month was significantly decreased from 0.64 to 0.42 (p

  • Patient satisfaction with telemedicine in Home Health Services for the elderly.
    International journal of medical informatics, 2001
    Co-Authors: Young Moon Chae, J Heon Lee, S Hee Ho, H Ja Kim, K Hong Jun, J Uk Won
    Abstract:

    In a pilot study of telemedicine in Home Health Services (HHS) for elderly patients, we implemented and evaluated a telemedicine system with a 33-kbs narrow-band approach to determine its effectiveness in providing quality Services. Fifty patients were selected for the study. We found that telemedicine was effective in terms of reducing the number of clinic visits and achieving patient satisfaction. The average number of clinic visits per month was significantly decreased from 0.64 to 0.42 (p < 0.05) after the use of telemedicine. 72% of patients were satisfied with telemedicine, but only patient location showed a significant difference for patient satisfaction (p < 0.05). Patients in their Homes (82%) were more satisfied than patients in nursing Homes (50%). Of four types of Services provided, medical consultation (100%) was the most highly satisfactory service with telemedicine, followed by physical therapy (83.3%). Although the satisfaction scores did not indicate a significant difference in the system characteristics, the quality of verbal communication appeared to be a more important factor in influencing patient satisfaction than set-up time or quality of image. A computer-based patient record was also developed to view a patient summary and to document encounters at the patient's Home. Since the system is a low-cost approach that is easy to interface with a notebook computer, it can support various other HHSs.

Kevin K. Chen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P < .0001), but otherwise similar to patients in the EPRA-HHS cohort. EPRA-only patients demonstrated no differences in VR-12 (P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior (P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. Methods We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. Results In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior ( P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. Conclusion The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS.

Afshin A. Anoushiravani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P < .0001), but otherwise similar to patients in the EPRA-HHS cohort. EPRA-only patients demonstrated no differences in VR-12 (P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior (P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

  • Home Health Services Are Not Required for Select Total Hip Arthroplasty Candidates: Assessment and Supplementation With an Electronic Recovery Application.
    The Journal of Arthroplasty, 2018
    Co-Authors: Roy I. Davidovitch, Afshin A. Anoushiravani, James E. Feng, Kevin K. Chen, Raj Karia, Ran Schwarzkopf, Richard Iorio
    Abstract:

    Abstract Background At our institution, all postoperative total hip arthroplasty (THA) candidates have received Home Health Services (HHS), consisting of visiting nurses, physical and occupational therapists. However, with a more technologically inclined patient population, electronic patient rehabilitation applications (EPRAs) can be used to deliver perioperative care at the comfort of the patient's Home. The aim of this study is to investigate the clinical utility and economic burden associated with digital rehabilitation applications in primary THA recipients. Methods We conducted a single-center, retrospective review of patients operated between November 2016 and November 2017. Before surgery, and at the discretion of the surgeon, patients were assigned to EPRA with HHS or EPRA alone. Patient baseline demographics, EPRA engagement, and validated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected (Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey [VR-12] and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior) at baseline and 12 weeks. These PRO scores were correlated with cohort assignments to assess noninferiority of EPRA alone. Results In total, 268 patients received either EPRA-HHS (n = 169) or EPRA (n = 99) alone. Patients receiving EPRA only were on average younger (60.8 vs 65.8; P P > .05) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Junior ( P > .05) when compared with EPRA-HHS. Conclusion The integration of electronic rehabilitation tools is gaining acceptance within the orthopedic community. Our study demonstrated that EPRA alone was clinically noninferior while substantially less costly than EPRA-HHS.