Andrea Fuentes
Clinical Assistant Professor, Neurology & Neurological Sciences
Bio
Dr. Fuentes is a board-certified neurologist with the Movement Disorders Center at Stanford Health Care. She is also a clinical assistant professor in the Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences. Dr. Fuentes completed a movement disorders fellowship at the University of California, San Francisco.
She provides comprehensive care for patients with different types of movement disorders, including Parkinson’s disease (PD), atypical parkinsonian disorders, essential tremor, ataxia, dystonia, and chorea. As part of her clinical practice, she performs deep brain stimulation (DBS) evaluation and programming and botulinum toxin injections.
Her research efforts include several clinical trials assessing treatments for movement disorders. She has been a sub-investigator on multiple trials evaluating drug candidates for the treatment of PD and ataxia. She has presented her work at national and international meetings, including those for the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society and the American College of Physicians.
Dr. Fuentes is a member of the American Academy of Neurology and the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
Clinical Focus
- Neurology
Professional Education
-
Fellowship: UCSF Neurology Fellowship Programs (2023) CA
-
Board Certification: American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, Neurology (2021)
-
Residency: University of Pennsylvania Dept of Neurology (2021) PA
-
Internship: Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania Dept of Internal Medicine (2018) PA
-
Medical Education: University of California San Diego School of Medicine (2017) CA
All Publications
-
Provider Experience with Teleneurology in an Academic Neurology Department.
Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association
2022; 28 (3): 374-383
Abstract
Introduction: Teleneurology has become widely adopted during severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic. However, provider impressions about the teleneurology experience are not well described. Methods: A novel questionnaire was developed to collect provider impressions about video teleneurology encounters. All providers in the University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) Neurology Department (N = 162) were asked to complete a questionnaire after each video teleneurology patient encounter between April and August 2020. Individual patient and encounter-level data were extracted from the electronic medical record. Results: One thousand six hundred three surveys were completed by 55 providers (response rate of 10.12%). The history obtained and the ability to connect with the patient were considered the same or better than an in-person visit in almost all encounters. The quality of the physician-patient relationship was good or excellent in 93%, while the overall experience was the same as an in-person visit in 73% of visits and better in 12%. Sixty-eight percent of respondents reported that none of the elements of the neurological examination if performed in person would have changed the assessment and plan. Assessment of the visit as the same or better increased from 83% in April to 89% in July and 95% in August. Headache (91%), multiple sclerosis and neuroimmunology (96%), and movement disorder (89%) providers had the highest proportion of ratings of same or better overall experience and neuromuscular providers the lowest (60%). Conclusions: Provider impressions about the teleneurology history, examination, and provider-patient relationship are favorable in the majority of responses. Important differences emerge between provider specialty and visit characteristics groups.
View details for DOI 10.1089/tmj.2021.0096
View details for PubMedID 34077285
View details for PubMedCentralID PMC9022168
- Decision-Making in Adult Neurology Decision-Making in Adult Neurology 2021: 201-211
- Decision-Making in Adult Neurology Decision-Making in Adult Neurology 2021: 212-213