What Is Your View On Tele-Medicine?

Personally, being in the medical field, I have very mixed feelings about tele-health.

I have watched technology enter and continue to integrate into medicine, probably more than any other field. There have been good outcomes, and some not so good.

COVID opened the door to a more accepted use of tele-medicine, and now that COVID is just about over, they are making the push to extend tale-health services.

I can give you personal examples that I have experienced over the last fifty years that would explain some of my greatest fears regarding tele-medicine, but I would like to know what most people know, and what they think about tele-medicine.

I doubt it will go away. just how far it will infiltrate our medical system, will depend on how willing the average person is willing to accept, and the purpose of my thread.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Those of us that have a fairly decent knowledge of medicine shouldn't have a problem with telemedicine. However, being able to measure your vital signs is important - a ox meter and BP cuff at the minimum.

I haven't seen my doctor in person in 2 years and so far it's working out just fine.

I don't think much about that telehealth medicine, nor do I think those computer programs that doctors type into are any good either. A doctor is trained to identify symptoms of diseases, and an experienced doctor who has worked in an area for many years gets pretty good at diagnosing illnesses. Young doctors do not have that experience, they need more time working with the older doctors who know their patients history from working with them for years.

I had a good doctor again, he was in his early forties and he was pretty good, but he left the office I go to and although he is in a different specialized office in the same hospital, he is no longer a GP. So I have to get a new doctor which sucks, we do not have that many good ones up here and people like good doctors so getting into one of the good ones is almost impossible.

I don't give a crap about bedside manner, I would rather have a doctor who tells me what he really thinks and informs me of changes I should make to improve my health. I have been lucky, I had only one pill pusher and she liked to push them and would bend the evidence away from reality to diagnose what she wanted everyone to believe. A deceiver of great experience and most times she is wrong in her diagnosis and can't even remember what she already tested for. If you say anything to her, she slams a medicine on you that makes you compliant, unable to reason so you have to believe her.

Now you can tell I don't think much of that one doctor can't you?

But remember, I have known many doctors in my life and she is one of two that I have dealt with that is like that, the rest of the doctors I had were pretty good. I know my own history, and also my family history, so I used to hint to doctors and they would take care of what was wrong with me. But until now, I have never actually known what caused my hereditary conditions, and I tell you....it took me years to verify what causes them and I have figured out how to fix the problem instead of treat the symptoms.

And I give thanks to the doctors who actually gave me some possible ideas in the past that helped me to research this...they did not know what caused my tachychardia and other hereditary diseases but told me I have to pay attention to what causes them.

originally posted by: billxam
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Those of us that have a fairly decent knowledge of medicine shouldn't have a problem with telemedicine. However, being able to measure your vital signs is important - a ox meter and BP cuff at the minimum.

I haven't seen my doctor in person in 2 years and so far it's working out just fine.

I like to think I have more than a decent knowledge of medicine, and I don't have a problem with the devices that measure vital signs, but the advancement of devices that use that data to diagnose and suggest treatment, is a whole other planet.

I have been in more than one situation where all the data registered by the electronic devices showed the patient to be stable and not requiring treatment, yet by visual examination by a doctor or nurse, found that data to be erroneous, and even times when just pure old gut knowledge ruled out.

a reply to: rickymouse

A doctor is trained to identify symptoms of diseases, and an experienced doctor who has worked in an area for many years gets pretty good at diagnosing illnesses. Young doctors do not have that experience, they need more time working with the older doctors who know their patients history from working with them for years.

An experienced doctor or nurse can pick up on things that electronic devices can miss. Of course there is medical data that can be identified by medical devices that we can't pick up on as humans as well, but I still feel that data is useless if not being analysis by a human doctor or nurse.

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn

a reply to: rickymouse

A doctor is trained to identify symptoms of diseases, and an experienced doctor who has worked in an area for many years gets pretty good at diagnosing illnesses. Young doctors do not have that experience, they need more time working with the older doctors who know their patients history from working with them for years.

An experienced doctor or nurse can pick up on things that electronic devices can miss. Of course there is medical data that can be identified by medical devices that we can't pick up on as humans as well, but I still feel that data is useless if not being analysis by a human doctor or nurse.





When you went to the doctor years ago, they did not wear gloves, they would put their hand on your forehead and down by the lymph nodes to check if they were warm. The rubber gloves really screwed up diagnosing of patients I feel. I noticed that already in the late nineties to early two thousands already and I even mentioned it to the doctor back then I went to and he said he agreed on that, that the gloves actually made it worse.....then he chuckled and said you do need them sometimes for checking out butts and stuff.

Edit, I do not know why part of your post is not in a box like usual ?????

Depends on the situation, if you for instance have a lump in your hand that came up quickly and is pressing on a vein tele med cant do much to identify it. (I know something I am dealing with ATM)

But if no obvious physical issues then probably a great tool.

originally posted by: Irishhaf
Depends on the situation, if you for instance have a lump in your hand that came up quickly and is pressing on a vein tele med cant do much to identify it. (I know something I am dealing with ATM)

But if no obvious physical issues then probably a great tool.

Tele-medicine has gone far beyond just the collection of data by an electronic device. It has moved on to exams, diagnosis, and even surgeries being performed remotely, by telephone or virtually.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

There are some things that telemedicine can do and some that it can't. In cases where it is impossible or highly unlikely for an in-person medical consult to take place, having a telemedicine interaction is definitely better than no medical interaction at all. On the other hand, if there actually is a medical problem with someone that requires quick response, only an in-person, hands-on interaction is going to do the trick. Telemedicine can't do it all, but there's no reason to not use it in those cases where it's appropriate.

Our local Mental Health Clinic uses Tele-Health for online therapy appointments.

I view it as beneficial for clients who have overwhelming sensory issues - they can check in with their therapist from the comfort of their own home.

The only downside is that as of the moment, there is an additional $40 charge to use the service.

We don't have nearly enough doctors here and many more quit during the covid, including mine. After trying to get in at walk in clinics a few times with no luck, I tried the telehealth. I only needed my adhd meds renewed so it was fairly simple but I don't see how they could really check a lot things, like if you called up in pain or feeling off. I can see it's use with mental issues but even then sometimes the root of it is physical.

I think telemedicine is a great idea as long as it doesn't become the norm. I don't want to lose the option of an in-person visit because some insurance company wants the cost savings.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Tele-medicine can sometines be the only alternative in some regions of your planet, remote areas with no infrastructure, desolated areas where wars and famine is rampant, yet areas where a satellite signal can make the difference between death and life.

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn
What Is Your View On Tele-Medicine?

Hard to give a short answer. My experience with tele-medicine has been mixed. I think there are providers who can do it well ... and others who are miserable failures at it. Maybe some of that has to do with Coding & Billing.

In the States, I wouldn't even consider it for pain management or some other chronic issues.

Government regulation can ruin it as well. So, what you hear back could work well in one country, yet totally fail here.

The reason is that population is aging and less healthcare workers are available in the future. Take a look of Hong Kong and smart technology for elderly.
Smart homes which guide elder to eat , exercise and take medicines also for social meetings without leaving home. Smart home floor can measure weight and smart fridge can give and heat food.

Medicine robots are already much used around the World in elder care. Robot tells when it is time to take a medicene and gives exact medicine in exact time.

Many of us already uses smart wristbands and patients vitals can be monitored by healthcare professionals and alarmed in time.

I read few years ago European Unions vision of future healtcare. People live in smarthomes, there are robots to help people even if they are immobile and doctors appointments can be via screen with the help of robot which does what doctor says.
Nurses go work.. they walk through scanner which measures their vitals and if something is wrong they will get medicine in next stop ( this sounded very absurd ) and continue their work.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

If I pay for a darn insurance I will get a darn real doctor when I have a medical problem, that is my take on all this technology, very soon the darn robots will be doing the treatments on the other side of the line.

a reply to: dollukka

living in a box the future of humanity, less crime, less complains and people will disappear without the neighbors even see it coming, sounds like a science fiction movie to me.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

It depends on what we're talking about.

Some things need to be hands-on, but others not as much. For example, I need to see my neurologist every year for a migraine update, but most every year, there is nothing to report except "I'm fine; still stable." For those appointments, there is no need for anything other than telehealth. I can do that over my phone from work. They take all of 15 minutes.

I see quite a few telehealth appointments in our cancer guides for things like seeing a nutritionist or an initial discussion with a speech specialist about what will need to take place after certain surgeries. Those consultations are mostly going to be spoken anyways, so they can easily be telehealth, and vitals and such have been taken care at the more weighty and immediate oncology consultations that are in person.

Frankly, it smacks to me of laziness, and I already am of the firm belief that we over-rely on the medical industry as a whole.

That over-reliance aside, I'm not particularly keen on doctors who avoid doing seemingly mundane, but in reality, rather crucial doctory things like palpating the organs. Let's just focus on the importance of palpation here. A machine cannot do this, and a First Timer Novice patient is risky to rely on for self-palpation.

Nah hosses, y'all can't do that unpapered, untrained & inexperienced effectively on ACTUAL patients anywhere without being laughed out of the room, so guess what also applies to telemedicine? That same laughter & dismissal for the touchless excuse reason.

Just one issue among many with Screentime Medicine that rub me the wrong way.

a reply to: Nyiah

Like I said - I think it depends. If we're talking something diagnostic, I think it needs to be in person, but if we're talking about something that's largely informational or merely to touch base, then maybe not as much, and it should always be with the understanding that another appointment that is in person could very shortly be in the offing depending on what's uncovered.

I did try one telehealth appointment with my PTs, our mutual agreement, to see how it would work, and we both agreed there was too much that needed to be hands on with my shoulder, even as far along as I was at that point for us to continue doing telehealth. So we rotated back into office visits.