Dataset Information

In-Person and Telehealth Ambulatory Contacts and Costs in a Large US Insured Cohort Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

This study assesses the role of telehealth in the delivery of care at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objectives

To document patterns and costs of ambulatory care in the US before and during the initial stage of the pandemic and to assess how patient, practitioner, community, and COVID-19-related factors are associated with telehealth adoption.

Design, setting, and participants

This is a cohort study of working-age persons continuously enrolled in private health plans from March 2019 through June 2020. The comparison periods were March to June in 2019 and 2020. Claims data files were provided by Blue Health Intelligence, an independent licensee of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association. Data analysis was performed from June to October 2020.

Main outcomes and measures

Ambulatory encounters (in-person and telehealth) and allowed charges, stratified by characteristics derived from enrollment files, practitioner claims, and community characteristics linked to the enrollee's zip code.

Results

A total of 36 568 010 individuals (mean [SD] age, 35.71 [18.77] years; 18 466 557 female individuals [50.5%]) were included in the analysis. In-person contacts decreased by 37% (from 1.63 to 1.02 contacts per enrollee) from 2019 to 2020. During 2020, telehealth visits (0.32 visit per person) accounted for 23.6% of all interactions compared with 0.3% of contacts in 2019. When these virtual contacts were added, the overall COVID-19 era patient and practitioner visit rate was 18% lower than that in 2019 (1.34 vs 1.64 visits per person). Behavioral health encounters were far more likely than medical contacts to take place virtually (46.1% vs 22.1%). COVID-19 prevalence in an area was associated with higher use of telehealth; patients from areas within the top quintile of COVID-19 prevalence during the week of their encounter were 1.34 times more likely to have a telehealth visit compared with those in the lowest quintile (the reference category). Persons living in areas with limited social resources were less likely to use telehealth (most vs least socially advantaged neighborhoods, 27.4% vs 19.9% usage rates). Per enrollee medical care costs decreased by 15% between 2019 and 2020 (from $358.32 to $306.04 per person per month). During 2020, those with 1 or more COVID-19-related service (1 470 721 members) had more than 3 times the medical costs ($1701 vs $544 per member per month) than those without COVID-19-related services. Persons with 1 or more telehealth visits in 2020 had considerably higher costs than persons having only in-person ambulatory contacts ($2214.10 vs $1337.78 for the COVID-19-related subgroup and $735.87 vs $456.41 for the non-COVID-19 subgroup).

Conclusions and relevance

This study of a large cohort of patients enrolled in US health plans documented patterns of care at the onset of COVID-19. The findings are relevant to policy makers, payers, and practitioners as they manage the use of telehealth during the pandemic and afterward.

SUBMITTER: Weiner JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7988360 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSince the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, few studies have assessed the association of telehealth with outcomes of care, including patterns of health care use after the initial encounter.ObjectiveTo assess the association of telehealth and in-person visits with outcomes of care during the COVID-19 pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study assessed continuously enrolled members in private health plans of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association from July 1, 2019, to December 31, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresMain outcomes were ambulatory encounters per enrollee stratified by characteristics derived from enrollment files, practitioner claims, and community characteristics linked to the enrollee's zip code. Outcomes of care were assessed 14 days after the initial encounters and included follow-up encounters of any kind, emergency department encounters, and hospitalizations after initial telehealth or in-person encounters.ResultsIn this cohort study of 40 739 915 individuals (mean [SD] age, 35.37 [18.77] years; 20 480 768 [50.3%] female), ambulatory encounters decreased by 1.0% and the number of in-person encounters per enrollee decreased by 17.0% from 2019 to 2020; however, as a proportion of all ambulatory encounters, telehealth encounters increased substantially from 0.6% (n = 236 220) to 14.1% (n = 5 743 718). For members with an initial telehealth encounter for a new acute condition, the adjusted odds ratio was 1.44 (95% CI, 1.42-1.46) for all follow-ups combined and 1.11 (95% CI, 1.06-1.16) for an emergency department encounter. For members with an initial telehealth encounter for a new chronic condition, the adjusted odds ratios were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.92-0.95) for all follow-ups combined and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.90-0.99) for in-patient admissions.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study of 40.7 million commercially insured adults, telehealth accounted for a large share of ambulatory encounters at the peak of the pandemic and remained prevalent after infection rates subsided. Telehealth encounters for chronic conditions had similar rates of follow-up to in-person encounters for these conditions, whereas telehealth encounters for acute conditions seemed to be more likely than in-person encounters to require follow-up. These findings suggest a direction for future work and are relevant to policy makers, payers, and practitioners as they manage the use of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic and afterward.

Project description:BackgroundInformation about telehealth versus in-office visits and how patient experience before compared to during the COVID-19 pandemic is important for healthcare planning.ObjectiveTo compare patient experience by visit type and before and during the pandemic.DesignSurvey of patients assessing ambulatory care before and during the pandemic.ParticipantsA total of 58,500 adult patients (13,928 primary care and 44,581 specialty physician visits) at a large integrated health system with 197 clinics on the west coast of the United States. The majority were female (59%), 55 or older (65%), and non-Hispanic White (55%), and had an in-office visit (87%) while 10% had a tele-video and 3% a phone visit.Main measuresConsumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Survey 3.0 doctor communication, care coordination, access, and office staff composites; an overall rating of the doctor; and whether the patient would recommend the doctor to family and friends.Key resultsPatient experience with telehealth visits was as positive as or more positive than that with traditional office-based visits. Doctor communication on tele-video visits was viewed as slightly more positive than that of in-office or phone visits. Tele-video visits were also slightly more positive than in-office visits for care coordination, overall rating of the doctor, and willingness to recommend to family and friends. Office staff were viewed less positively on the phone than tele-video or in-office visits. Patient experience was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., on a 0-100 possible range with a higher score being better, doctor communication was 94.4 before and 94.9 during).ConclusionsThe positive experiences with telehealth, especially tele-video, may be due to patient appreciation of efforts made to maintain access, the focused nature of telehealth visits, and help by staff for navigation technical issues. Lessons learned about delivering responsive telehealth care can be used to ensure high-quality care after the pandemic.

Project description:ImportanceThe identification of variation in health care is important for quality improvement. Little is known about how different pediatric subspecialties are using telehealth and what is driving variation.ObjectiveTo characterize trends in telehealth use before and during the COVID-19 pandemic across pediatric subspecialties and the association of delivery change with no-show rates and access disparities.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study, 8 large pediatric medical groups in California collaborated to share aggregate data on telehealth use for 11 pediatric subspecialties from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021.Main outcomes and measuresMonthly in-person and telehealth visits for 11 subspecialties, characteristics of patients participating in in-person and telehealth visits, and no-show rates. Monthly use rates per 1000 unique patients were calculated. To assess changes in no-show rates, a series of linear regression models that included fixed effects for medical groups and calendar month were used. The demographic characteristics of patients served in person during the prepandemic period were compared with those of patients who received in-person and telehealth care during the pandemic period.ResultsIn 2019, participating medical groups conducted 1.8 million visits with 549 306 unique patients younger than 18 years (228 120 [41.5%] White and 277 167 [50.5%] not Hispanic). A total of 72 928 patients (13.3%) preferred a language other than English, and 250 329 (45.6%) had Medicaid. In specialties with lower telehealth use (cardiology, orthopedics, urology, nephrology, and dermatology), telehealth visits ranged from 6% to 29% of total visits from May 1, 2020, to April 30, 2021. In specialties with higher telehealth use (genetics, behavioral health, pulmonology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, and neurology), telehealth constituted 38.8% to 73.0% of total visits. From the prepandemic to the pandemic periods, no-show rates slightly increased for lower-telehealth-use subspecialties (9.2% to 9.4%) and higher-telehealth-use subspecialties (13.0% to 15.3%), but adjusted differences (comparing lower-use and higher-use subspecialties) in changes were not statistically significant (difference, 2.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.2 to 6.3 percentage points; P = .15). Patients who preferred a language other than English constituted 6140 in-person visits (22.2%) vs 2707 telehealth visits (11.4%) in neurology (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThere was high variability in adoption of telehealth across subspecialties and in patterns of use over time. The documentation of variation in telehealth adoption can inform evolving telehealth policy for pediatric patients, including the appropriateness of telehealth for different patient needs and areas where additional tools are needed to promote appropriate use.

Project description:Objective To explore the perspectives of lactation support providers delivering breastfeeding education via in-person and telehealth consultations and assess the impact of COVID-19 on the provision of breastfeeding education. Design Qualitative descriptive study using purposive sampling. Setting Massachusetts-based lactation support providers who provided in-person and/or telehealth consultations in various practice settings (e.g., inpatient; outpatient; private practice; and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children). Participants Fourteen Massachusetts-based lactation support providers, ages 36 to 68 years. Measurements Participants completed an online demographic and employment characteristics survey and virtual key informant interviews, from which six main themes were defined. Results The six main themes included Common Questions Asked by Clients, Prenatal and Postpartum Consultation Topics, Facilitators for Telehealth Versus In-Person Consultations, Barriers for Telehealth Versus In-Person Consultations, Best Practices, and COVID-19 Adaptations. From participant interviews, common subthemes emerged. The primary adaptation due to COVID-19 was shifting to telehealth. Content in lactation consultations was similar via in-person and telehealth sessions. Typical content areas included breast pumping and mother’s milk supply. A notable difference was the lack of physical examinations for women and newborns in telehealth sessions. Scheduling flexibility was a key facilitator of telehealth consultations, whereas the inability to provide hands-on assistance and chaotic home environments were common barriers. In-person facilitators included weighing newborns to assess feeding success and insurance billing coverage, whereas unsupportive family members were noted as a barrier. Diversity, equity, and inclusion-related barriers (e.g., language barriers, lack of reflective diversity, lack of stable Internet access) were observed in both settings. Best practices for in-person and telehealth consultations included meeting mothers where they are and focusing on mothers’ goals. Conclusion Practice adaptations adopted during the pandemic and best practice recommendations may be useful for lactation support providers and other health care professionals caring for breastfeeding dyads. Practice adaptations adopted during the pandemic and best practice recommendations may be useful for lactation support providers and other health care professionals caring for breastfeeding dyads.