Teleneurology Improves Onboard Stroke Care
- mobile stroke units using telemedicine for neurologist assessments are as safe and resource-efficient as traditional units staffed with neurologists, according too a new study.
- The MSU-TELEMED trial, conducted across 10 hospitals in Melbourne, Australia, compared telemedicine-based assessments with the traditional onboard neurologist model.
- While the time from arrival to treatment decision was slightly longer in the telemedicine group—about four minutes—researchers deemed the delay offset by a notable reduction in resource use.
Telemedicine is revolutionizing stroke care, with mobile stroke units utilizing telemedicine proving to be as safe and efficient as those with onboard neurologists. A groundbreaking study reveals this innovative approach delivers comparable results in key operational areas, challenging the traditional model. This study, presented at ESOC 2025, shows that while treatment decision times may slightly increase, the resource efficiency gains are important. Patients receiving thrombolysis or endovascular therapy experienced similar functional outcomes irrespective of the care model. News Directory 3 recognizes these findings and the potential to transform stroke care. Discover how this paradigm shift can improve treatment accessibility and reduce costs, especially for those in rural areas, sparking a new era of rapid, effective stroke interventions.
Telemedicine Stroke Units: Safe and Efficient Alternative
Updated June 02, 2025
mobile stroke units using telemedicine for neurologist assessments are as safe and resource-efficient as traditional units staffed with neurologists, according too a new study. The research, presented at the European stroke Organisation Conference (ESOC) 2025, challenges the long-held belief that having a neurologist physically present is the optimal model for mobile stroke unit care.
The MSU-TELEMED trial, conducted across 10 hospitals in Melbourne, Australia, compared telemedicine-based assessments with the traditional onboard neurologist model. Vignan Yogendrakumar, MD, the study’s principal investigator, said the trial demonstrated telemedicine delivers comparable results in key operational areas.
While the time from arrival to treatment decision was slightly longer in the telemedicine group—about four minutes—researchers deemed the delay offset by a notable reduction in resource use. Among the 18% of patients receiving thrombolysis or endovascular therapy, functional outcomes at 90 days were similar in both groups.
yogendrakumar, assistant professor at the University of Ottawa and senior research fellow at the University of melbourne, emphasized the balance between resource utilization, treatment time, and safety. “The overall evaluation favors the telemedicine arm when it comes to balancing resource utilization with time to treatment and safety,” he said.
“There’s been a long-standing assumption that having a neurologist physically on board is the gold standard for mobile stroke unit care,but our trial shows that telemedicine delivers comparable outcomes in key operational domains,” said principal investigator Vignan Yogendrakumar,MD.
The study enrolled 275 patients with suspected stroke within 24 hours of symptom onset. Researchers used a hierarchical composite outcome, prioritizing safety, then time to treatment, and resource efficiency. Safety events occurred in 13% of the telemedicine group and 12% of the onboard group.
The median time to a definitive treatment decision was 19 minutes in the telemedicine group versus 13 minutes in the onboard group. However, neurologist “productive” time was substantially higher in the telemedicine group: 100% compared to 33% in the onboard group. About half the participants were diagnosed with ischemic stroke.For those receiving thrombolysis, the median time from arrival to needle was 8.2 minutes longer in the telemedicine group.
Yogendrakumar noted that the time saved by mobile stroke unit care balances the delay and the efficiency advantages achieved through telemedicine. He added, “We were able to show that a telemedicine model is better able to utilize resources without sacrificing safety or delivery of care, and that will likely translate to cost savings.” A formal cost-effectiveness analysis is planned.
What’s next
The findings may influence stroke care system design, with Melbourne already planning a second mobile stroke unit connected via telemedicine to a single neurologist. Experts like guillaume Turc and Simona Sacco praised the study’s design and highlighted the potential for telemedicine to improve stroke care, especially in rural areas.