Skip to content

Prehospital Telemedicine Feasibility/Acceptability Pilot

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Low-cost, Mobile Telemedicine Platform for Remote Assessment of Children Transported by Ambulance

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05967624
Enrollment
20
Registered
2023-08-01
Start date
2024-06-21
Completion date
2025-06-30
Last updated
2026-02-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Keywords

Teleconsultation

Brief summary

Teleconsultation, or the use of video telecommunications technology to deliver expert recommendations for care remotely, has been used to improve the safety and quality of emergency care for children in hospital-based acute care settings by providing real-time access to remote pediatric physician experts. Whether extending teleconsultation as a patient safety intervention to emergency medical systems (EMS) outside hospitals can similarly benefit sick and injured children in the community is unknown. Advances in mobile technology have made teleconsultation more accessible and affordable for EMS systems. However, this intervention has been underutilized by EMS partially due to the lack of prehospital research supporting its efficacy for pediatric applications. In prior simulation studies, the investigators found high intervention acceptance among key stakeholder groups (pediatric emergency physicians and paramedics), and demonstrated that it was feasible to integrate video communication into prehospital clinical workflows involving critical care delivery in high-risk pediatric scenarios. These initial simulation studies were conducted in a controlled prehospital setting in static ambulances using infant simulator manikins to minimize risk to children and providers. Demonstrating feasibility and acceptability with real children in moving ambulances is the next step to build the necessary evidence base to support future planned prehospital efficacy trials with children. The investigators hypothesize that remote respiratory assessment of children by medical control physicians (expert physicians) using a mobile teleconsultation platform is acceptable to users (physicians and transport providers), and technically feasible in real transports.

Detailed description

An open-label, nonrandomized, pilot feasibility trial will be conducted of children with respiratory distress transported by the Boston Children's Hospital (BCH) critical care transport team that also serves Boston Medical Center (BMC). Transport providers will initiate a video-call from the ambulance to medical control physician on call who will be at a geographically distant location. The physician will view streamed video of the child and complete a brief respiratory assessment checklist tool to determine video quality, a feasibility measure. The investigators will measure acceptability (primary outcome) and feasibility (secondary outcomes) on a validated questionnaire administered to users after each call. In this pilot study, efficacy will not be tested; all decision making will occur according to usual care protocols.

Interventions

OTHERTeleconsultation

Each subject will be remotely assessed by a Medical Control Physician (MCP) using Zoom Pro (HIPAA-compliant video-conferencing software) on tablet devices as a low-cost mobile telemedicine platform and the Respiratory Observation Checklist, validated for telemedicine use in emergency settings. All prehospital clinical decision making will be made at the discretion of evaluating paramedics as per standard state-approved protocols and procedures, independent of checklist results.

Sponsors

Boston Medical Center
Lead SponsorOTHER
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
CollaboratorNIH

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
No minimum to 17 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Children in New England transported by the Boston Children Hospital for respiratory illness from any cause * Clinically stable for transportation \[e.g., need supplemental oxygen, medications, or are stable on mechanical ventilation\]

Exclusion criteria

* Children with non-respiratory complaints * Children whose illness is anticipated by providers to be acutely life-threatening during transportation \[e.g., requiring emergency resuscitation procedures in the ambulance\] * Non-English speaking parents/guardians

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Agreement in Assessment of Respiratory DistressDuring transport to the hospital via ambulance, up to 4 hoursEach subject will be remotely assessed by a Medical Control Physician using the HIPAA-compliant Zoom Pro web application pre-loaded on a tablet device. The remote medical control physician and the transport team member at the patient bedside in the ambulance will score the Respiratory Observation Checklist simultaneously. The range for agreement is 0 to 1.0, where 0=no agreement and 1 is perfect agreement. The following scale: 0.01-0.20=none to slight, 0.21-0.40=fair, 0.41-0.60=moderate, 0.61-0.80=substantial, 0.81-1.0=almost perfect agreement will be used.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Total Usability ScoreImmediately after the transport was completed, up to 48 hoursThe total usability score is measured by the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ), a 21-item questionnaire which is a validated measure of all the key usability characteristics of telehealth platforms (usefulness, ease of use, effectiveness, reliability, and satisfaction). Users \[transport nurses and physicians\] rate items on 7-point Likert-scales (1=disagree to 7=agree) in 6 separate domains (usefulness, ease of use and learnability, interface quality, interaction quality, reliability, satisfaction and future use). The investigators modified this questionnaire to specifically address the usability of the study telemedicine platform. The range of the total usability score is 1-7. Low scores reflect a worse outcome, while high scores are a better outcome.
Video QualityImmediately after the transport was completed, up to 48 hoursThis will be measured by TUQ items #11 and #14 within the "Interaction Quality" domain. Users \[transport nurses and physicians\] will rate each item on a 7-point Likert-scale (1=disagree to 7=agree), so scores will range from 1 to 7. The mean score and standard deviation (SD) for each item will be reported. Higher scores suggest higher quality.
Audio Qualityimmediately after the transport was completed, up to 48 hoursThis will be measured by TUQ items #12 and #13 within the "Interaction Quality" domain. Users \[transport nurses and physicians\] will rate each item on a 7-point Likert-scale (1=disagree to 7=agree), so scores will range from 1 to 7. The mean score and SD for each item will be reported. Higher scores suggest higher quality.
Adequacy of Successful Video-call Connectionsimmediately after the transport was completed, up to 48 hoursThe number of attempts transport team providers make to successfully connect with the medical control physician via video-call will be recorded. Adequacy of successful video-call connection is defined as ≤2 attempts to achieve a video-call connection.
Percentage of Successful Tablet MountsSuccess/failure was assessed during transport, up to 4 hoursStudy investigators will note any problems with tablet mounts in the ambulance cabin (e.g., location makes call activation difficult), as well as specific qualitative comments from participants regarding tablet mount strategy. If no problems are noted the tablet mount will be considered successful and the percentage of successful table mounts will be reported.
Percentage of Calls With Adequate Video Quality for Assessmentduring ambulance transport, up to 4 hoursThis will be measured as the proportion of video-calls where clinicians are able to observe all ten items on the Respiratory Observation Checklist. This checklist tool has been previously validated for rapid, reliable assessment of children by teleconsultants in emergency settings. Medical control physicians will score 9 observable signs and a global assessment of respiratory distress dichotomously (present/absent).
Time to Arrival at Referring Facilityup to 240 minutesThis is the time interval (minutes) from when BCH receives the patient transport request from the referring facility to the time the transport team arrives at the referring facility. This will be abstracted from transport records.
Scene Timeup to 240 minutesThis is the time interval (minutes) from when the BCH transport team arrives at the referring facility to when the transport team leaves the referring facility. This will be abstracted from transport records.
Time to Arrival at Destination Facilityup to 240 minutesThis is the time interval (minutes) from when the BCH transport team leaves the referring facility to the time of arrival at BCH/BMC (the destination facility). This will be abstracted from transport records.
Total Transport Timeup to 240 minutesThis time interval encompasses the time from when the transport team is dispatched to the referring facility to when they arrive at the destination (receiving facility). This will be abstracted from transport records.

Countries

United States

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORTehnaz Boyle, MD PhD

Boston Medical Center

Baseline characteristics

Characteristic
Age, Continuous0.9 years
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
5 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
15 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black or African American
1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Unknown or Not Reported
3 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
15 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
20 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
7 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
13 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 20
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 20
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 20

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 20, 2026