Utilizing Telemedicine for Group Visit Provider Encounters: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study

Tushar A Patel, C. Johnston, V. Cardenas, Elizabeth M. Vaughan
{"title":"Utilizing Telemedicine for Group Visit Provider Encounters: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study","authors":"Tushar A Patel, C. Johnston, V. Cardenas, Elizabeth M. Vaughan","doi":"10.52106/2771-1331.1001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background The value of telemedicine has been underscored during the coronavirus pandemic. Utilizing telemedicine could markedly enhance group visit scalability and sustainability. However, there are limited data demonstrating telemedicine use for group visits. Objective To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of provider encounters conducted via telemedicine in group visits. Materials and Methods We conducted a 6-month diabetes group visit program and compared in-person (months 1–3) versus telemedicine (videoconferencing) (months 4–6) patient-provider encounters. Participants completed the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) at 6-months (primary outcome). To ensure telemedicine did not negatively affect clinical outcomes, we compared in-person versus telemedicine differences in HbA1c, blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), and attendance. Results The TUQ revealed that participants (N=19) found telemedicine useful and easy to use (4.9/5.0, 4.4/5.0, respectively) and with excellent interface (4.3/5.0), interaction (4.6/5.0), reliability (4.2/5.0), and satisfaction (4.4/5.0). There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between arms: HbA1c (in-person: −0.60%, telemedicine: −0.52%, p=0.86), blood pressure (systolic: p=0.475, diastolic: p=0.683), weight (p=0.982), BMI (p=0.981), attendance (in-person: 75.44%, telemedicine: 70.12%, p=0.551). Conclusion Provider telemedicine encounters in group visits are feasible and acceptable. This is a promising model to address provider limitations in group visits and increase access to care. Larger studies are needed to further evaluate these findings.","PeriodicalId":93108,"journal":{"name":"International journal of diabetes & metabolic syndrome","volume":"54 1","pages":"1 - 6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of diabetes & metabolic syndrome","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52106/2771-1331.1001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background The value of telemedicine has been underscored during the coronavirus pandemic. Utilizing telemedicine could markedly enhance group visit scalability and sustainability. However, there are limited data demonstrating telemedicine use for group visits. Objective To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of provider encounters conducted via telemedicine in group visits. Materials and Methods We conducted a 6-month diabetes group visit program and compared in-person (months 1–3) versus telemedicine (videoconferencing) (months 4–6) patient-provider encounters. Participants completed the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) at 6-months (primary outcome). To ensure telemedicine did not negatively affect clinical outcomes, we compared in-person versus telemedicine differences in HbA1c, blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), and attendance. Results The TUQ revealed that participants (N=19) found telemedicine useful and easy to use (4.9/5.0, 4.4/5.0, respectively) and with excellent interface (4.3/5.0), interaction (4.6/5.0), reliability (4.2/5.0), and satisfaction (4.4/5.0). There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between arms: HbA1c (in-person: −0.60%, telemedicine: −0.52%, p=0.86), blood pressure (systolic: p=0.475, diastolic: p=0.683), weight (p=0.982), BMI (p=0.981), attendance (in-person: 75.44%, telemedicine: 70.12%, p=0.551). Conclusion Provider telemedicine encounters in group visits are feasible and acceptable. This is a promising model to address provider limitations in group visits and increase access to care. Larger studies are needed to further evaluate these findings.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用远程医疗进行团体就诊:可行性和可接受性研究
在冠状病毒大流行期间,远程医疗的价值得到了强调。利用远程医疗可显著提高团体就诊的可扩展性和可持续性。然而,证明远程医疗用于团体就诊的数据有限。目的探讨在团体就诊中采用远程医疗方式就诊的可行性和可接受性。材料和方法我们进行了一个为期6个月的糖尿病小组访问项目,并比较了面对面(1-3个月)和远程医疗(视频会议)(4-6个月)患者与提供者的接触。参与者在6个月时完成了远程医疗可用性问卷(TUQ)(主要结果)。为了确保远程医疗不会对临床结果产生负面影响,我们比较了现场与远程医疗在HbA1c、血压、体重指数(BMI)和出勤方面的差异。结果19人认为远程医疗实用、易用(分别为4.9/5.0、4.4/5.0)、界面(4.3/5.0)、交互性(4.6/5.0)、可靠性(4.2/5.0)、满意度(4.4/5.0)较好。两组患者的临床结局无显著差异:HbA1c(面对面:- 0.60%,远程医疗:- 0.52%,p=0.86)、血压(收缩压:p=0.475,舒张压:p=0.683)、体重(p=0.982)、BMI (p=0.981)、出诊率(面对面:75.44%,远程医疗:70.12%,p=0.551)。结论小组就诊中远程医疗服务提供者会诊是可行的、可接受的。这是一种很有前途的模式,可以解决提供者在团体访问中的限制,并增加获得护理的机会。需要更大规模的研究来进一步评估这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Utilizing Telemedicine for Group Visit Provider Encounters: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study Utilizing Telemedicine for Group Visit Provider Encounters: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1