Analysis of Clinician and Patient Factors and Completion of Telemedicine Appointments Using Video

Translating Value Across Telehealth Stakeholders: A Rapid Review of Telehealth Measurement Evidence and a New Policy Framework to Guide Telehealth Researchers

Introduction: The surge in virtual care during the pandemic was accompanied by an increase in telehealth data of interest to policy stakeholders and other health care decision makers. However, these data often require substantial preprocessing and targeted analyses to be usable. By deliberately evaluating telehealth services with stakeholder perspectives in mind, telehealth researchers can more effectively inform clinical and policy decision making. Objective: To examine existing literature on telehealth measurement and evaluation and develop a new policy-oriented framework to guide telehealth researchers. Materials and Methods: A systematic rapid review of literature on telehealth measurement and evaluation was conducted by two independent reviewers in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The findings were analyzed and applied to the Supporting Pediatric Research on Outcomes and Utilization of Telehealth Evaluation and Measurement (STEM) Framework through the lens of key health care delivery decision makers to create a STEM Policy Framework Results: An initial search yielded 2,324 peer-reviewed articles and gray literatyre from 2012 to 2022, of which 56 met inclusion criteria. These measured and evaluated telehealth access (41.5%), quality (32.1%), cost (15.1%), experience (5.7%), and utilization (5.7%), consistent with the STEM Framework domains, but there was no universal approach. The STEM Policy Framework focuses this literature by describing data measures for each domain from the perspectives of five stakeholders. Conclusions: Literature describing measurement and evaluation approaches for telehealth is limited and not standardized, with few considering policy stakeholder perspectives. With this proposed STEM Policy Framework, we aim to improve this body of literature and support researchers seeking to inform telehealth policy through their work.

Reducing no-show visits and disparities in access: The impact of telemedicine

BACKGROUND

No-show visits have serious consequences for patients, providers, and healthcare systems as they lead to delays in care, increased costs, and reduced access to services. Telemedicine has emerged as a promising alternative to in-person visits by reducing travel barriers, but risks exacerbating the digital divide. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of telemedicine (video and phone) at a tertiary care academic center on no-show visits compared to in-person visits.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis of all weekday clinic visits among in-state adult patients at a single tertiary care center in the southeast from January 2020 to April 2023 was performed. Rates of no-show visits for patients who were seen via phone and video were compared with those who were seen in-person. Demographic and clinical characteristics of these groups were also compared, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and visit type. The primary outcome was the rate of no-show visits for each visit type.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 3,105,382 scheduled appointments, of which 81.2% were in-person, 13.4% via video, and 5.4% via phone calls. Compared to in-person visits, phone calls and video visits reduced the odds of no-show visits by 50% (aOR 0.5, CI 0.49-0.51) and 15% (aOR 0.85, CI 0.84-0.86), respectively. Older patients, Black patients, patients furthest from clinic, and patients from counties with the greatest degree of vulnerability and disparities in digital access were more likely to use phone visits. No-shows were more common among non-white, male, and younger patients from counties with lower socioeconomic status.

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine effectively reduced no-show visits. However, limiting telemedicine to video-based visits only exacerbated disparities in access. Phone calls allow historically underserved patients from lower socioeconomic backgrounds to access healthcare and should be included within the definition of telemedicine.

Staff-Facilitated Telemedicine Care Delivery for Treatment of Hepatitis C Infection among People Who Inject Drugs

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine offers the opportunity to provide clinical services remotely, thereby bridging geographic distances for people engaged in the medical system. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the widespread adoption of telemedicine in clinical practices has persisted, highlighting its continued relevance for post-pandemic healthcare. Little is known about telemedicine use among people from socially marginalized groups.

METHODS

The No One Waits (NOW) Study is a single-arm clinical trial measuring the acceptability, feasibility, and safety of an urban point-of-diagnosis hepatitis C (HCV) treatment initiation model delivered in a non-clinical community setting. Participants enrolled in the NOW Study are recruited via street outreach targeting people experiencing homelessness and injecting drugs. Throughout the NOW Study, clinical care is delivered through a novel staff-facilitated telemedicine model that not only addresses geographic and transportation barriers, but also technology and medical mistrust, barriers often unique to this population. While clinicians provide high-quality specialty practice-based care via telemedicine, on-site staff provide technical support, aid in communication and rapport, and review the clinicians' instructions and next steps with participants following the visits. Research questionnaires collect information on participants' experience with and perceptions of telemedicine (a) prior to treatment initiation and (b) at treatment completion.

DISCUSSION

For people from socially marginalized groups with HCV infection, creative person-centered care approaches are necessary to diagnose, treat, and cure HCV. Although non-clinical, community-based staff-facilitated telemedicine requires additional resources compared to standard-of-care telemedicine, it could expand the reach and offer a valuable entrance into technology-delivered care for socially marginalized groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03987503.

Caregivers' Role in In-Home Video Telehealth: National Survey of Occupational Therapy Practitioners

BACKGROUND

Older adults face barriers to specialty care, such as occupational therapy (OT), and these challenges are worse for rural older adults. While in-home video telehealth may increase access to OT, older adults' health- and technology-related challenges may necessitate caregiver assistance.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines caregiver assistance with in-home OT video telehealth visits from the perspectives of OT practitioners at Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

METHODS

A web-based national survey of VHA OT practitioners about caregivers' role in video telehealth was conducted between January and February 2022. Survey items were developed with input from subject matter experts in geriatrics and OT and identified patient factors that necessitate caregiver participation; the extent to which caregivers assist with different types of tasks (technological and clinical tasks); and the perceived facilitators of, benefits of, and barriers to caregiver involvement.

RESULTS

Of approximately 1787 eligible VHA OT practitioners, 286 (16% response rate) participated. Not all survey items required completion, resulting in different denominators. Most respondents were female (183/226, 81%), White (163/225, 72.4%), and occupational therapists (275/286, 96.2%). Respondents were from 87 VHA medical centers, the catchment areas of which served a patient population that was 34% rural, on average (SD 0.22). Most participants (162/232, 69.8%) had >10 years of OT experience serving a patient cohort mostly aged ≥65 years (189/232, 81.5%) in primarily outpatient rehabilitation (132/232, 56.9%). The top patient factors necessitating caregiver involvement were lack of technical skills, cognitive impairment, and advanced patient age, with health-related impairments (eg, hearing or vision loss) less frequent. Technological tasks that caregivers most frequently assisted with were holding, angling, moving, repositioning, or operating the camera (136/250, 54.4%) and enabling and operating the microphone and setting the volume (126/248, 50.8%). Clinical tasks that caregivers most frequently assisted with were providing patient history (143/239, 59.8%) and assisting with patient communication (124/240, 51.7%). The top facilitator of caregiver participation was clinician-delivered caregiver education about what to expect from video telehealth (152/275, 55.3%), whereas the top barrier was poor connectivity (80/235, 34%). Increased access to video telehealth (212/235, 90.2%) was the top-rated benefit of caregiver participation. Most respondents (164/232, 70.7%) indicated that caregivers were at least sometimes unavailable or unable to assist with video telehealth, in which case the appointment often shifted to phone.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers routinely assist VHA patients with in-home OT video visits, which is invaluable to patients who are older and have complex medical needs. Barriers to caregiver involvement include caregivers' challenges with video telehealth or inability to assist, or lack of available caregivers. By elucidating the caregiver support role in video visits, this study provides clinicians with strategies to effectively partner with caregivers to enhance older patients' access to video visits.

Social Determinants of Health and Patients' Technology Acceptance of Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Pilot Survey

BACKGROUND

Telehealth has been widely adopted by patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many social determinants of health influence the adoption.

OBJECTIVE

This pilot study aimed to understand the social determinants of patients' adoption of telehealth in the context of the pandemic.

METHODS

A survey methodology was used to capture data from 215 participants using Amazon Mechanical Turk. The study was guided by the technology acceptance model and the social determinants of health framework. The questionnaire included technology acceptance model variables (eg, perceived usefulness [PU] and perceived ease of use [PEOU]), social determinants (eg, access to health care, socioeconomic status, education, and health literacy), and demographic information (eg, age, sex, race, and ethnicity). A series of ordinary least squares regressions were conducted to analyze the data using SPSS Statistics (IBM Corp).

RESULTS

The results showed that social determinant factors-safe neighborhood and built environment (P=.01) and economic stability (P=.05)-are predictors of the PEOU of telehealth adoption at a statistically significant or marginally statistically significant level. Furthermore, a moderated mediation model (PROCESS model 85) was used to analyze the effects of COVID-19 on the neighborhood, built environment, and economic stability. PEOU and PU significantly positively affected users' intention to use technology for both variables.

CONCLUSIONS

This study draws attention to 2 research frameworks that address unequal access to health technologies. It also adds empirical evidence to telehealth research on the adoption of patient technology. Finally, regarding practical implications, this study will provide government agencies, health care organizations, and health care companies with a better perspective of patients' digital health use. This will further guide them in designing better technology by considering factors such as social determinants of health.

Patient-reported Primary Care Video and Telephone Telemedicine Preference Shifts During the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Patient perceptions of primary care telephone and video telemedicine and whether COVID-19 pandemic-related telemedicine exposure shifted patients' visit preference is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

We examined patient surveys to understand the health care experience of patients seeking primary care through telemedicine and how patients expected their preferences to shift as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESEARCH DESIGN/SUBJECTS

In an integrated delivery system that shifted to a "telemedicine-first" health care model during the COVID-19 pandemic, we sampled monthly and collected 1000 surveys from adults with primary care telemedicine visits scheduled through the online patient portal between 3/16/2020 and 10/31/2020.

MEASURES

Participants reported their preferred primary care visit modality (telephone, video, or in-person visits) across 3 time points: before, during and (hypothetically) after the COVID-19 pandemic, and reported their general assessment of primary care visits during the pandemic.

RESULTS

The majority of participants preferred in-person visits before (69%) and after the COVID-19 pandemic (57%). However, most participants reported a preference for telemedicine visits during the pandemic and continue to prefer telemedicine visits at a 12% higher rate post-pandemic. Many participants (63%) expressed interest in using telemedicine at least some of the time. Among participants reporting a recent telemedicine visit, 85% agreed that the visit addressed their health needs.

CONCLUSION

As primary care visit modality preferences continue to evolve, patients anticipate that they will continue to prefer telemedicine visits, both video and telephone, at an increased rate than before the COVID-19 pandemic.

Use of Real Time Clinical Video Telehealth to Home by primary care providers within the Veterans Health Administration during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: variability across VA stations and with time

Objective

Determine the extent to which use of Clinical Video Telehealth to Home (VT2H) for primary care licensed independent practitioner visits (PCLIPVs) varied over time and across the Veterans Health Administration (VA) during the first 18 months of the COVID pandemic, and if there was an association between VT2H usage and VA station characteristics.

Materials and Methods

All outpatient encounters (n = 12 143 456) for Veterans (n = 4 373 638) that had VA PCLIPVs during the period of observation were categorized as conducted by VT2H, in-person, or telephone. The change over time in the percentage of total PCLIPVs conducted by VT2H was plotted and associations between VA station characteristics and VT2H usage were analyzed using simple statistics and negative binomial regression.

Results

Between March 2020 and mid-August 2020, VT2H visits increased from <2% to 13% of all VA PCLIPVs. However, VT2H usage varied substantively by VA station and declined system-wide to <9% of PCLIPVs by July 2021. VA stations that serve a greater proportion of rural Veterans were found less likely to use VT2H.

Discussion

The VA was successful in increasing the use of VT2H for PCLIPVs during the first phase of the COVID pandemic. However, VT2H usage varied by VA station and over time. Beyond rurality, it is unknown what station characteristics may be responsible for the variance in VT2H use.

Conclusion

Future investigation is warranted to identify the unique practices employed by VA stations that were most successful in using VT2H for PCLIPVs and whether they can be effectively disseminated to other stations.

Food Insecurity Screening in Primary Care: Patterns During the COVID-19 Pandemic by Encounter Modality

INTRODUCTION

Screening for food insecurity in clinical settings is recommended, but implementation varies widely. This study evaluated the prevalence of screening for food insecurity and other social risks in telehealth versus in-person encounters during the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in screening before versus after widespread COVID-19 vaccine availability.

METHODS

These cross-sectional analyses used electronic health record and ancillary clinic data from a national network of 400+ community health centers with a shared electronic health record. Food insecurity screening was characterized in 2022 in a sample of 275,465 first encounters for routine primary care at any network clinic during March 11, 2020-December 31, 2021. An adjusted multivariate multilevel probit model estimated screening prevalence on the basis of encounter mode (in-person versus telehealth) and time period (initial pandemic versus after vaccine availability) in a random subsample of 11,000 encounters.

RESULTS

Encounter mode was related to food insecurity screening (p<0.0001), with an estimated 9.2% screening rate during in-person encounters, compared with 5.1% at telehealth encounters. There was an interaction between time period and encounter mode (p<0.0001), with higher screening prevalence at in-person versus telehealth encounters after COVID-19 vaccines were available (11.7% vs 4.9%) than before vaccines were available (7.8% vs 5.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Food insecurity screening in first primary care encounters is low overall, with lower rates during telehealth visits and the earlier phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Future research should explore the methods for enhancing social risk screening in telehealth encounters.

Impact of Telemedicine Modality on Quality Metrics in Diverse Settings: Implementation Science-Informed Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Video-based telemedicine (vs audio only) is less frequently used in diverse, low socioeconomic status settings. Few prior studies have evaluated the impact of telemedicine modality (ie, video vs audio-only visits) on clinical quality metrics.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess telemedicine uptake and impact of visit modality (in-person vs video and phone visits) on primary care quality metrics in diverse, low socioeconomic status settings through an implementation science lens.

METHODS

Informed by the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework, we evaluated telemedicine uptake, assessed targeted primary care quality metrics by visit modality, and described provider-level qualitative feedback on barriers and facilitators to telemedicine implementation.

RESULTS

We found marginally better quality metrics (ie, blood pressure and depression screening) for in-person care versus video and phone visits; de-adoption of telemedicine was marked within 2 years in our population.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the widespread implementation of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of visit modality on quality outcomes, provider and patient preferences, as well as technological barriers in historically marginalized settings should be considered.

Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aimed to assess the certainty of evidence for digital versus conventional, face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders, concerning validity, reliability, feasibility, patient satisfaction, physiotherapist satisfaction, adverse events, clinical management, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria: Original studies comparing digital physiotherapy assessment with face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders. Systematic database searches were performed in May 2021, and updated in May 2022, in Medline, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, AMED, and PEDro. Risk of bias and applicability of the included studies were appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool and the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies tool. Included studies were synthesised narratively. Certainty of evidence was evaluated for each assessment component using GRADE.

RESULTS

Ten repeated-measures studies were included, involving 193 participants aged 23-62 years. Reported validity of digital physiotherapy assessment ranged from moderate/acceptable to almost perfect/excellent for clinical tests, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pain, neck posture, and management decisions. Reported validity for assessing spinal posture varied and was for clinical observations unacceptably low. Reported validity and reliability for digital diagnosis ranged from moderate to almost perfect for exact+similar agreement, but was considerably lower when constrained to exact agreement. Reported reliability was excellent for digital assessment of clinical tests, range of motion, pain, neck posture, and PROMs. Certainty of evidence varied from very low to high, with PROMs and pain assessment obtaining the highest certainty. Patients were satisfied with their digital assessment, but did not perceive it as good as face-to-face assessment.

DISCUSSION

Evidence ranging from very low to high certainty suggests that validity and reliability of digital physiotherapy assessments are acceptable to excellent for several assessment components. Digital physiotherapy assessment may be a viable alternative to face-to-face assessment for patients who are likely to benefit from the accessibility and convenience of remote access.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review was registered in the PROSPERO database, CRD42021277624.

Twenty-first century house calls: a survey of ambulatory care providers to inform organisational telehealth strategy

OBJECTIVES

While patient interest in telehealth increases, clinicians' perspectives may influence longer-term adoption. We sought to identify facilitators and barriers to continued clinician incorporation of telehealth into practice.

METHODS

A cross-sectional 24-item web-based survey was emailed to 491 providers with ≥50 video visits (VVs) within an academic health system between 1 March 2020 and 31 December 2020. We quantitatively summarised the characteristics and perceptions of respondents by using descriptive and test statistics. We used systematic content analysis to qualitatively code open-ended responses, double coding at least 25%.

RESULTS

247 providers (50.3%) responded to the survey. Seventy-nine per cent were confident in their ability to deliver excellent clinical care through VV. In comparison, 48% were confident in their ability to troubleshoot technical issues. Most clinicians (87%) expressed various concerns about VV. Providers across specialties generally agreed that VV reduced infection risk (71%) and transportation barriers (71%). Three overarching themes in the qualitative data included infrastructure and training, usefulness and expectation setting for patients and providers.

DISCUSSION

As healthcare systems plan for future delivery directions, they must address the tension between patients' and providers' expectations of care within the digital space. Telehealth creates new friction, one where the healthcare system must fit into the patient's life rather than the usual dynamic of the patient fitting into the healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

Telehealth infrastructure and patient and clinician technological acumen continue to evolve. Clinicians in this survey offered valuable insights into the directions healthcare organisations can take to right-size this healthcare delivery modality.

Older adults' perspectives on primary care telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic there were many barriers to telemedicine primary care for adults ≥65 years including insurance coverage restrictions and having lower digital access and literacy. With the pandemic, insurance coverage broadened and many older adults utilized telemedicine creating an opportunity to learn from their experiences to inform future policy.

METHODS

Between April 2020 and June 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional multimethod study of English-speaking, cognitively-intact, adults ≥65, who had a phone-only and/or video telemedicine visit with their primary care physician within one large Massachusetts health system (10 different practices) since March 2020. The study questionnaire asked participants their overall satisfaction with telemedicine (7-point scale) and to compare telemedicine with in-person care. We used linear regression to examine the association between participants' demographics, Charlson comorbidity score, and survey completion date with their satisfaction score. The questionnaire also included open-ended questions on perceptions of telemedicine; which were analyzed using qualitative methods.

RESULTS

Of 278 eligible patients reached, 208 completed the questionnaire; mean age was 74.4 years (±4.4), 61.5% were female, 91.4% were non-Hispanic White, 64.4% had ≥1 comorbidity, and 47.2% had a phone-only visit. Regardless of their age, participants reported being satisfied with telemedicine; median score was 6.0 on the 7-point scale (25th percentile = 5.0 and 75th percentile = 7.0). Non-Whites satisfaction scores were on average 1 point lower than those of non-Hispanic Whites (p = 0.02). Those with comorbidity reported scores that on average were 0.5 points lower than those without comorbidity (p = 0.07). Overall, 39.5% felt their telemedicine visit was worse than in-person care; 4.9% thought it was better. Participants appreciated telemedicine's convenience but described frustrating technical challenges. While participants preferred in-person care, most wanted telemedicine to remain available.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults ≥65 reported being satisfied with primary care telemedicine during the pandemic's first 14 months and wanted telemedicine to remain available.

Disparities in cancer genetics care by race/ethnicity among pan-cancer patients with pathogenic germline variants

BACKGROUND

Germline risk assessment is increasing as part of cancer care; however, disparities in subsequent genetic counseling are unknown.

METHODS

Pan-cancer patients were prospectively consented to tumor-normal sequencing via custom next generation sequencing panel (Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets) inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes from January 2015 through December 2019 (97.5% research nonbillable) with protocol for genetics referral. Rates of pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PVs) and downstream counseling were compared across ancestry groups (mutually exclusive groups based on self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish [AJ] heritage) using nonparametric tests and multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Among 15,775 patients (59.6%, non-Hispanic [NH]-White; 15.7%, AJ; 20.5%, non-White [6.9%, Asian; 6.8%, Black/African American (AA); 6.7%, Hispanic; 0.1%, Other], and 4.2%, unknown), 2663 (17%) had a PV. Non-White patients had a lower PV rate (n = 433, 13.4%) compared to NH-Whites (n = 1451, 15.4%) and AJ patients (n = 683, 27.6%), p < .01, with differences in mostly moderate and low/recessive/uncertain penetrance variants. Among 2239 patients with new PV, 1652 (73.8%) completed recommended genetic counseling. Non-White patients had lower rates of genetic counseling (67.7%) than NH-White (73.7%) and AJ patients (78.8%), p < .01, with lower rates occurring in Black/AA (63%) compared to NH-White patients, even after adjustment for confounders (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.97; p = .036). Non-White, particularly Black/AA and Asian, probands had a trend toward lower rates and numbers of at-risk family members being seen for counseling/genetic testing.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite minimizing barriers to genetic testing, non-White patients were less likely to receive recommended cancer genetics follow-up, with potential implications for oncologic care, cancer risk reduction, and at-risk family members.

LAY SUMMARY

Genetic testing is becoming an important part of cancer care, and we wanted to see if genetics care was different between individuals of different backgrounds. We studied 15,775 diverse patients with cancer who had genetic testing using a test called MSK-IMPACT that was covered by research funding. Clinically important genetic findings were high in all groups. However, Black patients were less likely to get recommended counseling compared to White patients. Even after removing many roadblocks, non-White and especially Black patients were less likely to get recommended genetics care, which may affect their cancer treatments and families.

Perioperative Telemedicine Utilization Among Geriatric Patients Being Evaluated for Abdominal Wall Reconstruction and Hernia Repair

Introduction: Perioperative telemedicine services have increasingly been utilized for ambulatory care, although concerns exist regarding the feasibility of virtual consultations for older patients. We sought to review telemedicine encounters for geriatric patients evaluated at a hernia repair and abdominal wall reconstruction center. Methods: A retrospective review of telemedicine encounters between May 2020 and May 2021 was performed. Patient characteristics and encounter-specific outcomes were compared among geriatric (older than65 years old) and nongeriatric patients. Clinical care plans for encounters were reviewed to determine potential downstream care utilization. Patient-derived benefits related to time saved in travel time was calculated using geo-mapping. Outcomes for postoperative encounters were assessed to determine if complication rates differed between geriatric and nongeriatric populations. Results: A total of 313 telemedicine encounters (geriatric: 41.9%) were conducted among 251 patients. Reviewing preoperative factors for hernia care, geriatric patients presented with higher rates of recurrent or incisional hernias (87.9% vs. 70.7%, p < 0.01). Potential travel time was longer for geriatric patients (104 min vs. 42 min, p = 0.03) in the preoperative setting. No differences in clinical care plans were found. Only 8.6% of preoperative encounters resulted in recommendations for supplemental in-person evaluation. Operative plans were coordinated for 42.5% of all preoperative telemedicine encounters. There was no difference in complication rate between geriatric and nongeriatric patients (p > 0.05) in the postoperative setting, with no complications directly attributable to telemedicine-based care. Conclusions: Telemedicine-based evaluations appear to function well among geriatric patients seeking hernia repair and abdominal wall reconstruction. Clinical care plans rendered following telemedicine-based encounters are appropriate with a low rate of supplemental in-person evaluations. Telemedicine use resulted in significantly more time saved in commuting to and from clinic for geriatric patients.

Utilization and Adequacy of Telemedicine for Outpatient Pediatric Surgical Care

INTRODUCTION

Telemedicine (TM) use accelerated out of necessity during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the utility of TM within the pediatric surgery population is unclear. This study measured utilization, adequacy, and disparities in uptake of TM in pediatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Scheduled outpatient pediatric surgery clinic encounters at a large academic children's hospital from January 2020 through March 2021 were reviewed. Sub-group analysis examined post-operative (PO) visits after appendectomy and umbilical, epigastric, and inguinal hernia repairs.

RESULTS

Of 9149 scheduled visits, 87.9% were in-person and 12.1% were TM. TM visits were scheduled for PO care (76.9%), new consultations (7.1%), and established patients (16.0%). Although TM visits were more frequently canceled or no shows (P < 0.001), most canceled TM visits were PO visits, of which 41.7% were canceled via electronic communication reporting the absence of any PO concerns. TM visits were adequate for accomplishing visit goals in 98.2%, 95.5%, and 96.2% of PO, new, and established patient visits, respectively. Patients utilizing TM visits were more frequently of white race, privately-insured, from less disadvantaged neighborhoods, and living a greater distance from clinic (P < 0.001 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSIONS

TM was adequate for the majority of visits in which it was utilized, including the basic PO visits that occurred via TM. TM was used more by patients with greater travel and less by those of minority race, with public insurance, and from more disadvantaged neighborhoods. Future work is necessary to ensure broad access to this useful tool for all children requiring surgical care.

Strategies Facilitating Video Visit Implementation by a Medical Group Serving a Diverse Population

IntroductionVideo visits have created new opportunities to enhance access to care, but limited information exists on strategies medical groups can employ to facilitate video visit use by higher-risk patients. Our objective was to identify generalizable strategies to facilitate successful delivery of video visits by systems serving highly diverse patient populations. MethodsThe authors conducted a qualitative study of physicians and staff members in a large group practice with 4.5 million patients with diverse race and ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Semi-structured interviews were conducted between January 2021 and April 2021, with key informants identified via purposive and snowball sampling. Video-recorded interviews were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify major themes and subthemes. ResultsThe 42 key informants included regional and medical center leaders, primary care physicians, service managers, and medical assistants. Participants described clinical leadership in technology and multidisciplinary collaboration as crucial to sustained video care adoption. Strategies to facilitate real-time learning included local innovation, rapid communication channels, and psychological safety. The organization offered broad access to frequently updated data reports to help managers and practitioners understand processes, measure performance, and share best practices. Medical assistants and physicians developed new approaches to empathize, tailor interactions with patients, and overcome psychological and technical barriers to connecting via video. ConclusionsKey strategies for sustained video care adoption included clinical leadership articulating its purpose, multidisciplinary collaboration, local innovation, effective data use, empathy, and personalized care. These findings provide a model for how health care systems can foster robust adoption of technologies to serve diverse populations.

Identifying Barriers to Successful Completion of Video Telemedicine Visits in Urology

PURPOSE

The utilization of video telemedicine has dramatically increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, significant social and technological barriers have led to disparities in access. We aimed to identify factors associated with patient inability to successfully initiate a video visit across a high-volume urologic practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Video visit completion rates and patient characteristics were extracted from the electronic medical record and linked with census-level socioeconomic data. Associations between video visit failure were identified using multivariate regression modeling and random forest ensemble classification modeling.

RESULTS

6,086 patients and their first video visits were analyzed. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, Hispanic or Latino patients (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.31-0.89), patients insured by Medicare (OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.26-0.79) or Medicaid (OR 0.50, 95%CI 0.29-0.87), patients of low socioeconomic status (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.98-0.99), patients with an un-activated MyChart patient portal (OR 0.43, 95%CI 0.29-0.62), and patients unconfirmed at appointment reminder (OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.48-0.96) were significantly associated with video visit failure. Patients with primary diagnosis category of men's health (OR 47.96, 95%CI 10.24-856.35), and lower urinary tract syndromes (OR 2.69, 95%CI 1.66-4.51) were significantly associated with video visit success. Random forest analyses identified insurance status and socioeconomic status as the top predictors of video visit failure.

CONCLUSIONS

An analysis of a Urology video telemedicine cohort reveals clinical and demographic disparities in video visit completion and priorities for future interventions to ensure equity of access. Our study further suggests that specific urologic indications may play a role in success or failure of video visits.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on England's national prescriptions of oral vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs): an interrupted time series analysis (January 2019-February 2021)

BACKGROUND

Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were developed as an alternative to warfarin to treat and prevent thromboembolism, including stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients. The COVID-19 pandemic could increase the risk of stroke and/or the risk of bleeding in patients due to nonadherence or sub/supra-optimal dosing.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate DOAC prescription trends in England's community settings during the complete first wave of COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Descriptive and interrupted time series (ITS) analyses were conducted to examine the prescription patterns of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) and warfarin for primary care patients in the English Prescribing Dataset from January 2019 to February 2021, with March 2020 as the cut-off point.

RESULTS

A 19% increase in mean DOAC's accompanied with 20% warfarin prescriptions decline was observed. ITS modelling showed an increase in DOAC prescription volume in March 2020 (+7 million items, p = 0.008). The pre-existing upward trend in DOAC prescriptions slowed during the period (-427,000 items, p = 0.007). Apixaban was the most frequently used DOAC and had the largest step-change in March 2020 (+5 million items, p = 0.010). The mean monthly combined cost of DOACs and warfarin was higher during the period. DOAC prescription trends were consistent across England's regions. Conclusion: The overall oral anticoagulants use in this period was lower than expected, indicating a medical needs gap, possibly due to adherence issues. The potential clinical and logistical consequences warrant further study to identify contributing factors and mitigate avoidable risks.

Hospitalization Outcomes Among Patients With COVID-19 Undergoing Remote Monitoring

IMPORTANCE

Health care systems have implemented remote patient monitoring (RPM) programs to manage patients with COVID-19 at home, but the associations between participation and outcomes or resource utilization are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether an RPM program for COVID-19 is associated with lower or higher likelihood of hospitalization and whether patients who are admitted present earlier or later for hospital care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective, observational, cohort study of RPM was performed at Froedtert & Medical College of Wisconsin Health Network, an academic health system in southeastern Wisconsin. Participants included patients with internal primary care physicians and a positive SARS-CoV-2 test in the ambulatory setting between March 30, 2020, and December 15, 2020. Data analysis was performed from February 15, 2021, to February 2, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Activation of RPM program.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Hospitalizations within 2 to 14 days of a positive test. Inverse propensity score weighting was used to account for differences between groups. Sensitivity analyses were performed looking at usage of the RPM among patients who activated the program.

RESULTS

A total of 10 660 COVID-19-positive ambulatory patients were eligible, and 9378 (88.0%) had email or mobile numbers on file and were invited into the RPM program; the mean (SD) age was 46.9 (16.3) years and 5448 patients (58.1%) were women. Patients who activated monitoring (5364 patients [57.2%]) had a mean (SD) of 35.3 (33.0) check-ins and a mean (SD) of 1.27 (2.79) (median [IQR], 0 [0-1]) free-text comments. A total of 878 patients (16.4%) experienced at least 1 alert; 128 of 5364 activated patients (2.4%) and 158 of 4014 inactivated patients (3.9%) were hospitalized (χ21 = 18.65; P < .001). In weighted regression analysis, activation of RPM was associated with a lower odds of hospitalization (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54-0.86; P = .001) adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and time period. Monitored patients had a longer mean (SD) time between test and hospitalization (6.67 [3.21] days vs 5.24 [3.03] days), a shorter length of stay (4.44 [4.43] days vs 7.14 [8.63] days), and less intensive care use (15 patients [0.3%] vs 44 patients [1.1%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that activation of an RPM program is associated with lower hospitalization, intensive care use, and length of stay among patients with COVID-19.

Disparities in Telemedicine Success and Their Association With Adverse Outcomes in Patients With Thoracic Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic

IMPORTANCE

Disparities in access to telemedicine were identified at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, but the consequences of these disparities are not well characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate factors associated with successfully accessing and completing telemedicine visits and the association between telemedicine visit success and clinical outcomes among patients with thoracic cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study included patients who attended outpatient visits at the thoracic oncology division of Johns Hopkins Medical Institute in Baltimore, Maryland, from March 1 to July 17, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Associations of age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance status, marital status, zip code, type of cancer, cancer stage, and type of therapy with telemedicine visit success (defined as completed visits with synchronous audio-video connection) and of visit success status with changes in therapy and odds of emergency department and urgent care visits, hospitalizations, and death were assessed using χ2 and Fisher exact tests and are reported as odds ratios (ORs).

RESULTS

A total of 720 patients and 1940 visits with complete data were included in the analysis; the median patient age was 65.7 years (range, 54.7-76.7 years), and 384 (53.33%) were male. Of the 1940 visits, 679 (35.00%) were in person and 1261 (65.00%) were telemedicine. Of the telemedicine visits, 717 (56.86%) were successful and 544 (43.14%) were unsuccessful. Patients who were Black (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.95), had Medicaid (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.81), or were from a zip code with an elevated risk of cancer mortality (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29-0.90) were less likely to have successful telemedicine visits than to have unsuccessful visits. Patients with at least 1 unsuccessful telemedicine visit had higher likelihood of an emergency department (OR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.42-5.22) or urgent care (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 2.41-8.41) visit or hospitalization (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.17-4.80). Similarly, patients who had no successful telemedicine visits and for whom more than 1 telemedicine visit was scheduled had a higher likelihood of an emergency department (OR, 3.43; 95% CI 1.80-6.52) or urgent care (OR, 4.24; 95% CI 2.24-8.03) visit or hospitalization (OR, 4.19; 95% CI 2.17-8.10). Patients with all successful telemedicine visits (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30-0.90) or only 1, unsuccessful visit (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.13-0.75) had lower odds of death compared with patients seen in-person only. Starting a new therapy was associated with lower odds of having a telemedicine visit vs an in-person visit (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.64) and higher odds of a successful telemedicine visit vs an unsuccessful telemedicine visit (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.28-2.82).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this cohort study, patients with thoracic cancer who were Black, had Medicaid, or were from a zip code with a high risk of cancer mortality had increased odds of unsuccessful telemedicine visits compared with their counterparts and unsuccessful telemedicine visits were associated with worse clinical outcomes compared with successful visits. These findings suggest that more work is needed to improve telemedicine access for disadvantaged patients.

The Bugs In the Virtual Clinic: Confronting Telemedicine’s Challenges Through Empathy and Support (Preprint)

Although telemedicine has been an important conduit for clinical care during the COVID-19 pandemic, not all patients have been able to meaningfully participate in this mode of health care provision. Challenges with accessing telemedicine using consumer technology can interfere with the ability of patients and clinicians to meaningfully connect and lead to significant investments in time by clinicians and their staff. In this narrative case, we identify issues related to patients’ use of technology, make comparisons between telehealth adoption and the deployment of electronic health records, and propose that building intuitive and supported digital care experiences for patients is required to make virtual care sustainable.