Role of Visit Modality in the HIV-Related No-Shows During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multisite Retrospective Cohort Study

Effectiveness of telehealth versus in-person care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review

In this systematic review, we compared the effectiveness of telehealth with in-person care during the pandemic using PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from March 2020 to April 2023. We included English-language, U.S.-healthcare relevant studies comparing telehealth with in-person care conducted after the onset of the pandemic. Two reviewers independently screened search results, serially extracted data, and independently assessed the risk of bias and strength of evidence. We identified 77 studies, the majority of which (47, 61%) were judged to have a serious or high risk of bias. Differences, if any, in healthcare utilization and clinical outcomes between in-person and telehealth care were generally small and/or not clinically meaningful and varied across the type of outcome and clinical area. For process outcomes, there was a mostly lower rate of missed visits and changes in therapy/medication and higher rates of therapy/medication adherence among patients receiving an initial telehealth visit compared with those receiving in-person care. However, the rates of up-to-date labs/paraclinical assessment were also lower among patients receiving an initial telehealth visit compared with those receiving in-person care. Most studies lacked a standardized approach to assessing outcomes. While we refrain from making an overall conclusion about the performance of telehealth versus in-person visits the use of telehealth is comparable to in-person care across a variety of outcomes and clinical areas. As we transition through the COVID-19 era, models for integrating telehealth with traditional care become increasingly important, and ongoing evaluations of telehealth will be particularly valuable.

Telephone versus video consultations: A systematic review of comparative effectiveness studies and guidance for choosing the most appropriate modality

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review compared clinical, service and cost effectiveness of telephone consultations (TC) to video consultations (VC).

METHODS

We searched Embase, CINAHL and MEDLINE for empirical studies that compared TC to VC using clinical, service or economic outcome measures. Clinician or patient preference and satisfaction studies were excluded. Findings were synthesised descriptively.

RESULTS

A total of 79 articles were included. The most effective modality was found to be VC in 40 studies (50%) and TC in 3 (4%). VC and TC were found to be equivalent in 28 of the included articles (35%). VC were superior or equivalent to TC for all clinical outcomes. When compared to TC, VC were likely to have better patient engagement and retention, to improve transfer decisions, and reduce downstream sub-acute care utilisation. The impact of telehealth modality on consultation time, completion rates, failure-to-attend rates and acute care utilisation was mixed. VC were consistently found to be more cost effective despite having a higher incremental cost than TC.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review demonstrates equal or better, but not inferior clinical and cost outcomes for consultations delivered by VC when compared to TC. VC appear to be more clinically effective when visual information is required, when verbal communication with the patient is impaired and when patient engagement and retention is linked to clinical outcomes. We have provided conditions where VC should be used in preference to TC. These can be used by clinicians to guide the choice of telehealth modality. Cost effectiveness is also important to consider when choosing modality.