Telemedicine is the practice of medicine when the doctor and patient are widely separated using two-way voice and visual communication as in satellite or computer (Merrium-Webster). Telemedicine is an emerging service that doctors, and facilities are starting to provide to patients. Cecilie Bisgaard-Frantzen discusses in her article “Is Telemedicine Right for You?” on this new way of diagnosing and treating patients. Joan Raymond also speaks on the benefits and breakdowns of telemedicine in her article, “Pros and Cons of Getting a Second Opinion Online”.
There are numerous benefits that can come from telemedicine, but yet there are still things that can never replace the relationship of seeing a Dr. in person for certain reasons that both articles touch base on. Telemedicine can offer more convenience and access to doctors for patients but can also may be a lot of work to get started. Both articles talk about the cost and have different views on the subject. Both authors, Bisgaard-Frantzen and Raymond give us a range of the positives and negatives on the use of telemedicine.
In person care between Dr’s and patient will still be needed. Bisgaard-Frantzen discusses that seeing the Dr. in person is still needed in some circumstances. If a patient is not physically seen a Dr can’t give an accurate examination and prescribe the needed meds. Things can be misconstrued or missed over video links. “Certain non-verbal cues might still slip through the cracks.” states Cecilie. Doctors relying on the patient’s ability to describe their symptoms ailments instead of their own could lead to potential misdiagnoses. Doctor patient relationships usually build over time and patients become comfortable with their doctor. This allows them to share more and pick up on queues better between each other according to Bisgaard-Frantzen. With telemedicine, these strong relationships wouldn’t develop.
127 our experts are availableright now
Raymond also discusses the need for in person doctor visits. Joan writes that the American Medical Association doesn’t oppose online second opinions, but it does say in-person visits offer more benefits. She also quotes Dr. George Demetri of the Center for Sarcoma and Bone Oncology at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute as having said ‘Medicine is in the details, and you can’t give an opinion when those details are lacking.’. This relates closely to Bisgaard-Frantzen’s information about doctors and patients picking up on queues from each other better when they have formed close relationships with one another.
Another topic the articles have in common is that telemedicine offers many conveniences for doctors and patients alike. Online medicine can reach areas of the country and even the world that have a hard or long time traveling for a doctor’s visit. Technology can open many doors for patients that need regular monitoring. Bisgaard-Frantzen tells readers that monitors for blood pressure and diabetes could be directly uploaded to the doctor daily so that the doctor can view the progress and even generate alerts of negative instances to prevent complications. Patients can also avoid potentially contracting other illnesses by not having to wait in waiting rooms with other sick individuals. Second opinions are also easier to obtain though telemedicine. Many patients prefer to get second opinions especially when it involves something very serious such as cancers or surgeries. Telemedicine can offer patients access to a greater number of specialists for the second opinions they are seeking. Telemedicine could also have a downfall in the convenience area if the internet or power were to suddenly shut down.
Joan Raymond agrees that there are many conveniences to telemedicine in her article. She informs readers that many health care systems offer second opinion services internationally but not many do so domestically. Those that do offer domestic services get a lot of interest. Raymond also quotes a doctor that discusses the fact that telemedicine allows doctors to share more knowledge with one another. It creates a larger database of resources for the patients and the doctors. Through Raymond readers discover that there are limitations to telemedicine in some areas due to medical boards putting regulations on the online services. It can also be a tedious task to collect all the materials needed from your records to send to the online services for consults. This could entail many phone calls and stops at the local doctor’s office before being able to submit an inquiry to an online doctor. Both authors agree that there are some walls that are thrown up in the convenience area of telemedicine.
Cost seemed to be a conflicting issue in the articles. Bisgaard-Frantzen believes telemedicine can be cheaper for patients. “A telemedicine consult might cost $40 to $70, compared for $130 to $180 for an office visit.” (Bisgaard-Frantzen). According to the article insurance companies are jumping on the band wagon and beginning to cover the costs of telemedicine. “Recently the nation’s largest health insurer, United Healthcare, announced that it has established a partnership with Doctor On Demand, along with two other telemedicine companies.” writes Bisgaard-Frantzen. If insurance companies will begin covering telemedicine it will cut down out of pocket costs to patients the same as in office visits. This view of it being cheaper differs from that of Joan Raymond.
Regarding expense, Raymond believes it could be much costlier for online medicine. Most insurance companies still will not cover online consults. A majority of the time the doctors that are sought for online opinions are specialists and they are much more expensive that a regular doctor. To pay for a specialists’ consult out of pocket would be quite costly with no help from insurance coverages. $550 to $1000 is the estimated cost range Raymond gives if the specialist needs to read any lab or image result during their consult. This is a much steeper number that that of Bisgaard-Frantzen. Both agree, however, that if interest from consumers continues to grow that insurance companies will eventually begin to cover these telemedicine services.
All in all, the authors seem to agree with each other about the benefits that telemedicine has for patients. Both Raymond and Bisgaard-Frantzen mention things in their articles that tell readers, despite the many benefits of telemedicine, in person doctor visits cannot be replaced due to the improved sharing of information that occurs with built up relationships between doctors and patients. Convenience is a major plus with telemedicine as well with both authors. Today everything is so fast paced and a lot of things revolve around technology. It makes sense that medicine might as well be added to the list of things that can be done on the fly. With telemedicine doctors can be more available to anyone worldwide regardless of location or status. It is unsure about the costs of the online services but insurance companies may be on the rise of covering telemedicine. Raymond believes it is costly but that is regarding specialists that are costly no matter where they are seen. Regular doctors would be cheaper to see online. If insurance companies get on the bandwagon telemedicine would be an amazing thing for many people to utilize!
Work Cited
- Bisgaard-Frantzen, Cecilie. ‘Is Telemedicine Right for You?’ 10 June 2015. Berkely Wellness. Article. 22 June 2017. .
Merrium-Webster. Dictionary. 2019. . - Raymond, Joan. ‘Pros and Cons of Getting a Second Opinion Online.’ 10 December 2008. Newsweek. Article. 21 June 2017. .
