Dataset Information

Predictors of Audio-Only Versus Video Telehealth Visits During the COVID-19 Pandemic

ABSTRACT:

Background

Most health insurance organizations reimbursed both video and audio-only (i.e., phone) visits during the COVID-19 pandemic, but may discontinue phone visit coverage after the pandemic. The impact of discontinuing phone visit coverage on various patient subgroups is uncertain.

Objective

Identify patient subgroups that are more probable to access telehealth through phone versus video.

Design

Retrospective cohort.

Patients

All patients at a U.S. academic medical center who had an outpatient visit that was eligible for telehealth from April through June 2020.

Main Measures

The marginal and cumulative effect of patient demographic, socioeconomic, and geographic characteristics on the probability of using video versus phone visits.

Key Results

A total of 104,204 patients had at least one telehealth visit and 45.4% received care through phone visits only. Patient characteristics associated with lower probability of using video visits included age (average marginal effect [AME] −6.9% for every 10 years of age increase, 95%CI −7.8, −4.5), African-American (AME −10.2%, 95%CI −11.4, −7.6), need an interpreter (AME −19.3%, 95%CI −21.8, −14.4), Medicaid as primary insurance (AME −12.1%, 95%CI −13.7, −9.0), and live in a zip code with low broadband access (AME −7.2%, 95%CI −8.1, −4.8). Most patients had more than one factor which further reduced their probability of using video visits.

Conclusions

Patients who are older, are African-American, require an interpreter, use Medicaid, and live in areas with low broadband access are less likely to use video visits as compared to phone. Post-pandemic policies that eliminate insurance coverage for phone visits may decrease telehealth access for patients who have one or more of these characteristics.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11606-021-07172-y.

SUBMITTER: Chen J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8597874 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionTelehealth utilization surged during the COVID-19 pandemic, offering expanded health care access. Audio-only visits emerged as a crucial tool for patients facing technology or connectivity barriers to still use telehealth. This qualitative study aims to better understand patient perceptions of audio-only versus video telehealth visits during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how patients perceive the role of each in their overall health care.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 adult patients seeking care at an academic medical center located in the Southeast region of the United States. Patients had experienced both an audio-only and video telehealth visit within the past 6 months. Topics covered in the interview included comfort, preference, quality, and communication during each type of visit. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded, and analyzed using a general inductive approach.ResultsParticipants valued having both modalities available largely due to convenience and saw these visits as supplemental or supporting their in-person care. Preferences for visit types were varied among participants and were context-specific, influenced by visit purpose and provider rapport. Patients viewed audio-only visits favorably for informational follow-ups and highlighted their convenience, particularly for multitasking and caregiving duties. In contrast, video visits were seen as more effective for communication due to visual cues and better suited for demonstrating health conditions. Audio-only visits were also seen as less technology-dependent and served as a vital back-up to failed video encounters.DiscussionDespite varied preferences, patients perceived both modalities as complementary to in-person care. Concerns around the quality of care were mitigated by patients' and providers' judicious use of visit types based on clinical appropriateness and existing rapport. The results emphasize the necessity and flexibility of audio-only visits in ensuring equitable access to telehealth, especially for those with technology limitations or demanding responsibilities. To maintain the access and convenience afforded by telehealth and ensure these benefits are offered equitably, policy makers and health care organizations must continue to provide flexible telehealth options, including audio-only visits.

Project description:BackgroundTelehealth has the potential to improve health care access for patients but it has been underused and understudied for examining patients with substance use disorders (SUD). VA began distributing video-enabled tablets to veterans with access barriers in 2016 to facilitate participation in home-based telehealth and expanded this program in 2020 due to the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectiveExamine the impact of VA's video-enabled telehealth tablets on mental health services for patients diagnosed with SUD.MethodsThis study included VA patients who had ≥1 mental health visit in the calendar year 2019 and a documented diagnosis of SUD. Using difference-in-differences and event study designs, we compared outcomes for SUD-diagnosed patients who received a video-enabled tablet from VA between March 15th, 2020 and December 31st, 2021 and SUD-diagnosed patients who never received VA tablets, 10 months before and after tablet-issuance. Outcomes included monthly frequency of SUD psychotherapy visits, SUD specialty group therapy visits and SUD specialty individual outpatient visits. We examined changes in video visits and changes in visits across all modalities of care (video, phone, and in-person). Regression models adjusted for several covariates such as age, sex, rurality, race, ethnicity, physical and mental health chronic conditions, and broadband coverage in patients' residential zip-code.ResultsThe cohort included 21,684 SUD-diagnosed tablet-recipients and 267,873 SUD-diagnosed non-recipients. VA's video-enabled tablets were associated with increases in video visits for SUD psychotherapy (+3.5 visits/year), SUD group therapy (+2.1 visits/year) and SUD individual outpatient visits (+1 visit/year), translating to increases in visits across all modalities (in-person, phone and video): increase of 18 % for SUD psychotherapy (+1.9 visits/year), 10 % for SUD specialty group therapy (+0.5 visit/year), and 4 % for SUD specialty individual outpatient treatment (+0.5 visit/year).ConclusionsVA's distribution of video-enabled tablets during the COVID-19 pandemic were associated with higher engagement with video-based services for SUD care among patients diagnosed with SUD, translating to modest increases in total visits across in-person, phone and video modalities. Distribution of video-enabled devices can offer patients critical continuity of SUD therapy, particularly in scenarios where they have heightened barriers to in-person care.

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid and expansive roll out of telehealth applications as a mode of intervention delivery. The effectiveness of this model of care is currently unclear.ObjectiveA cross-sectional observational study evaluating the Irish physiotherapist's experience of telehealth.MethodIrish Physiotherapists completed an online survey, distributed by the Irish Society of Chartered Physiotherapists (ISCP), exploring considerations and barriers to commencing telehealth, advantages and disadvantages to telehealth, overall experience of telehealth, and their opinion on the future of telehealth. A descriptive approach and conceptual content analysis were used to analysis the data to derive determinants for the continuation of telehealth.ResultsIn total, 205 physiotherapists completed the survey. Seventy-eight per cent were female. Participant's mean age range was 36 to 45 years with 17 years of physiotherapy experience. Eighty-three per cent had no experience with telehealth pre COVID-19. Considerations to commencing telehealth included service user's suitability, adequate technical and organisational resources, physiotherapist's professional conduct, physiotherapist's skills and COVID-19 restrictions. No outstanding barrier to telehealth was identified. Respondents identify that telehealth offered a reduction in travel time for the service user (82%), offer flexibility in the delivery of physiotherapy (81%) and avoid contact with a potential COVID-19 spreader (92%). The limited scope of the physical examination (86%) via telehealth is the significant disadvantage. Telehealth is considered a temporary stop-gap during the COVID-19 pandemic by forty per cent of physiotherapists while sixty per cent consider telehealth as a sustainable alternative mode of health care delivery.ConclusionAt present, health care providers have not universally accepted telehealth as a mode of health care delivery. Our study's findings identify key areas to address to encourage acceptance.

Project description:BackgroundWith over 37.8 million cases and over 1 million deaths worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic has created a societal and economic upheaval of unparalleled magnitude. A positive transformation has been brought about by innovative solutions in the health care sector that aim to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on human health. For instance, the use of telehealth has been on the rise amidst this public health emergency.ObjectiveGiven the unprecedented scale of the pandemic with no definitive endpoint, we aimed to scope the existing telehealth-related literature during a defined period of the ongoing pandemic (ie, January to June 2020).MethodsOur scoping review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer Manual. We systematically searched PubMed and Embase databases with specific eligibility criteria. Data extracted from the shortlisted articles included first author and affiliation, journal title, publication type, terminologies used to describe telehealth and their accompanying definitions, health discipline or medical specialties and subspecialties wherein telehealth had been applied, the purpose of telehealth use, and the authors' overall sentiment on telehealth use. We collated the available information and used descriptive statistics to analyze the synthesized data.ResultsIn all, 543 articles published across 331 different journals were included in this scoping review. The Journal of Medical Internet Research and its sister journals featured the highest number of articles (25/543, 4.6%). Nearly all (533/543, 98.2%) articles were in English. The majority of the articles were opinions, commentaries, and perspectives (333/543, 61.3%). Most authors of the articles reviewed were from high-income countries (470/543, 86.6%), especially from the United States of America (237/543, 43.6%). In all, 39 different definitions were used to describe terms equivalent to telehealth. A small percentage (42/543, 7.7%) of the articles focused on the provision of COVID-19-related care. Moreover, 49.7% (270/543) of the articles primarily focused on the provision of multiple components of clinical care, and 23% (125/543) of the articles focused on various specialties and subspecialties of internal medicine. For a vast majority (461/543, 84.9%) of the articles, the authors expressed a celebratory sentiment about the use of telehealth.ConclusionsThis review identified considerable emerging literature on telehealth during the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic, albeit mostly from high-income countries. There is compelling evidence to suggest that telehealth may have a significant effect on advancing health care in the future. However, the feasibility and application of telehealth in resource-limited settings and low- and middle-income countries must be established to avail its potential and transform health care for the world's population. Given the rapidity with which telehealth is advancing, a global consensus on definitions, boundaries, protocols, monitoring, evaluation, and data privacy is urgently needed.