Dataset Information

Telemedicine Use in Orthopaedic Surgery Varies by Race, Ethnicity, Primary Language, and Insurance Status.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Healthcare disparities are well documented across multiple subspecialties in orthopaedics. The widespread implementation of telemedicine risks worsening these disparities if not carefully executed, despite original assumptions that telemedicine improves overall access to care. Telemedicine also poses unique challenges such as potential language or technological barriers that may alter previously described patterns in orthopaedic disparities.

Questions/purposes

Are the proportions of patients who use telemedicine across orthopaedic services different among (1) racial and ethnic minorities, (2) non-English speakers, and (3) patients insured through Medicaid during a 10-week period after the implementation of telemedicine in our healthcare system compared with in-person visits during a similar time period in 2019?

Methods

This was a retrospective comparative study using electronic medical record data to compare new patients establishing orthopaedic care via outpatient telemedicine at two academic urban medical centers between March 2020 and May 2020 with new orthopaedic patients during the same 10-week period in 2019. A total of 11,056 patients were included for analysis, with 1760 in the virtual group and 9296 in the control group. Unadjusted analyses demonstrated patients in the virtual group were younger (median age 57 years versus 59 years; p < 0.001), but there were no differences with regard to gender (56% female versus 56% female; p = 0.66). We used self-reported race or ethnicity as our primary independent variable, with primary language and insurance status considered secondarily. Unadjusted and multivariable adjusted analyses were performed for our primary and secondary predictors using logistic regression. We also assessed interactions between race or ethnicity, primary language, and insurance type.

Results

After adjusting for age, gender, subspecialty, insurance, and median household income, we found that patients who were Hispanic (odds ratio 0.59 [95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.91]; p = 0.02) or Asian were less likely (OR 0.73 [95% CI 0.53 to 0.99]; p = 0.04) to be seen through telemedicine than were patients who were white. After controlling for confounding variables, we also found that speakers of languages other than English or Spanish were less likely to have a telemedicine visit than were people whose primary language was English (OR 0.34 [95% CI 0.18 to 0.65]; p = 0.001), and that patients insured through Medicaid were less likely to be seen via telemedicine than were patients who were privately insured (OR 0.83 [95% CI 0.69 to 0.98]; p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Despite initial promises that telemedicine would help to bridge gaps in healthcare, our results demonstrate disparities in orthopaedic telemedicine use based on race or ethnicity, language, and insurance type. The telemedicine group was slightly younger, which we do not believe undermines the findings. As healthcare moves toward increased telemedicine use, we suggest several approaches to ensure that patients of certain racial, ethnic, or language groups do not experience disparate barriers to care. These might include individual patient- or provider-level approaches like expanded telemedicine schedules to accommodate weekends and evenings, institutional investment in culturally conscious outreach materials such as advertisements on community transport systems, or government-level provisions such as reimbursement for telephone-only encounters.

Level of evidence

Level III, therapeutic study.

SUBMITTER: Xiong G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8208394 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceEmergency department (ED) triage substantially affects how long patients wait for care but triage scoring relies on few objective criteria. Prior studies suggest that Black and Hispanic patients receive unequal triage scores, paralleled by disparities in the depth of physician evaluations.ObjectivesTo examine whether racial disparities in triage scores and physician evaluations are present across a multicenter network of academic and community hospitals and evaluate whether patients who do not speak English face similar disparities.Design, setting, and participantsThis was a cross-sectional, multicenter study examining adults presenting between February 28, 2019, and January 1, 2023, across the Mass General Brigham Integrated Health Care System, encompassing 7 EDs: 2 urban academic hospitals and 5 community hospitals. Analysis included all patients presenting with 1 of 5 common chief symptoms.ExposuresEmergency department nurse-led triage and physician evaluation.Main outcomes and measuresAverage Triage Emergency Severity Index [ESI] score and average visit work relative value units [wRVUs] were compared across symptoms and between individual minority racial and ethnic groups and White patients.ResultsThere were 249 829 visits (149 861 female [60%], American Indian or Alaska Native 0.2%, Asian 3.3%, Black 11.8%, Hispanic 18.8%, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander <0.1%, White 60.8%, and patients identifying as Other race or ethnicity 5.1%). Median age was 48 (IQR, 29-66) years. White patients had more acute ESI scores than Hispanic or Other patients across all symptoms (eg, chest pain: Hispanic, 2.68 [95% CI, 2.67-2.69]; White, 2.55 [95% CI, 2.55-2.56]; Other, 2.66 [95% CI, 2.64-2.68]; P < .001) and Black patients across most symptoms (nausea/vomiting: Black, 2.97 [95% CI, 2.96-2.99]; White: 2.90 [95% CI, 2.89-2.91]; P < .001). These differences were reversed for wRVUs (chest pain: Black, 4.32 [95% CI, 4.25-4.39]; Hispanic, 4.13 [95% CI, 4.08-4.18]; White 3.55 [95% CI, 3.52-3.58]; Other 3.96 [95% CI, 3.84-4.08]; P < .001). Similar patterns were seen for patients whose primary language was not English.Conclusions and relevanceIn this cross-sectional study, patients who identified as Black, Hispanic, and Other race and ethnicity were assigned less acute ESI scores than their White peers despite having received more involved physician workups, suggesting some degree of mistriage. Clinical decision support systems might reduce these disparities but would require careful calibration to avoid replicating bias.

Project description:Importance:Approximately 10% to 30% of patients with sarcoma present with detectable metastases at diagnosis. However, the extent to which presentation with metastases is due to delayed diagnosis vs other factors remains unclear. Objective:To evaluate whether socioeconomic status, insurance status, or race/ethnicity were associated with the presence of metastases at diagnosis of sarcoma. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study used data from the population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Adult and pediatric patients with an initial diagnosis of soft-tissue and bone sarcoma between 2001 and 2015 were stratified by age group (pediatric, <20 years; adult, 20-65 years; older adult, >65 years) and sarcoma subtype. Statistical analyses were performed between August 2019 and January 2020. Exposures:Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Census tract-level socioeconomic status index, insurance status, and race/ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures:The odds of presenting with metastases at diagnosis were calculated. Results:A total of 47?337 patients with first primary malignant sarcoma were included (24?343 male patients [51.4%]), with 29?975 non-Hispanic White patients (63.3%), 5673 non-Hispanic Black patients (12.0%), 7504 Hispanic patients (15.8%), and 4185 American Indian-Alaskan Native and Asian Pacific Islander patients (8.8%). Liposarcoma in adults was the only subtype and age group combination that demonstrated a significant trend in incidence across socioeconomic status levels (odds ratio, 0.85; 99% CI, 0.76-0.96; P?=?.001). However, compared with having non-Medicaid insurance, having Medicaid or no insurance in adults was associated with an increased odds of metastases at diagnosis for 6 of the 8 sarcoma subtypes evaluated; osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma were the only 2 subtypes in adults for which metastases were not associated with insurance status. In addition, there was an increased risk of presenting with metastases among non-Hispanic Black adults diagnosed with leiomyosarcoma (odds ratio, 1.87; 99% CI, 1.41-2.48) and unclassified sarcomas (odds ratio, 1.65; 99% CI, 1.01-2.67) compared with non-Hispanic White adults that was independent of socioeconomic and insurance status. Conclusions and Relevance:These findings suggest that delayed access to care is associated with advanced stage at diagnosis for several soft-tissue sarcoma subtypes in adults, whereas other factors may be associated with the metastatic progression of osteosarcoma and Ewing sarcoma, as well as the racial disparities observed with metastatic leiomyosarcoma and unclassified sarcomas.