Knowledge, Readiness, Willingness-to-Use, and Willingness-to-Pay for Telehealth in Nonlife-Threatening Emergency Department Visits.

Abstract

Background: The emergency department (ED) provides a significant portion of health care services in the United States, and its utilization has increased over the past decade. ED overcrowding remains a considerable challenge to many EDs. The objectives of this study were (1) to evaluate the knowledge of telehealth and readiness to use it among patients who visit EDs in a nonurgent triage category and (2) to estimate their willingness-to-use and willingness-to-pay for telehealth consultations.

Methods: A structured questionnaire was administered using a tablet to adult patients who visited the ED of a large medical center and who were triaged into a nonurgent category. Respondents were asked about their sociodemographic and ED visit characteristics and health and telehealth utilization history. Then, we presented them with a hypothetical scenario for visiting a board-certified ED doctor through telehealth instead of in-person visits, and, using a double-bound dichotomous choice iterative bidding algorithm, we solicited their willingness-to-pay for such a telehealth visit.

Results: A total of 171 patients agreed to participate in the study. More than half of the respondents (n = 107; 62.6%) said they have health insurance. Almost half of the respondents (n = 71; 41.5%) reported the main reason for going to the ED was an ongoing condition or concern. More than two-thirds of the respondents identified themselves as being very proficient with using a smartphone or tablet (n = 116; 67.8%), and only a few (n = 21; 12.3%) reported not having any internet-capable device. Most respondents (n = 148; 86.5%) had never heard about telehealth. However, after a brief description of telehealth, we found that approximately two-thirds of the patients would be willing to use or consider using telehealth (n = 107; 62.6%), and one-third (n = 64; 37.4%) would not be interested. We did not observe any statistically significant differences in willingness-to-use. However, we observed statistically significant differences in the willingness-to-pay $50 by gender (p < 0.01), by currently having a regular doctor/clinic (p < 0.05), and by health insurance status.

Conclusions: Hospitals should consider investigating telehealth services that can be provided to their communities as an option instead of visiting their EDs. While technology does not seem to be a barrier to telehealth, more educational initiatives to inform the public about telehealth are desirable. A targeted advertisement campaign to recommend telehealth for nonlife-threatening ED visits could be developed once more user characteristics are collected.