{"title":"大流行期间的产前远程保健:社会人口学和临床关联","authors":"Cheng Gao, S. Osmundson, B. Malin, You Chen","doi":"10.30953/tmt.v6.279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Like other areas of care affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth (both audio and video) was rapidly adopted in the obstetric setting. We performed a retrospective analysis of electronic health record (EHR) data to characterize the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with telehealth utilization among patients who received prenatal care. \nMaterials and Methods: The study period covered March 23rd, 2020 to July 2nd, 2020, during which time 2,521 patients received prenatal care at a large academic medical center. We applied a generalized logistic regression to measure the relationship between the patients’ sociodemographic factors (in terms of age, race, ethnicity, urbanization level, and insurance type), pregnancy complications (namely, type 2 diabetes, chronic hypertension, and fetal growth restriction), and telehealth usage, as documented in the EHR. \nResults: During the study period, 2,521 patients had 16,516 prenatal care visits. 938 (37.2%) of the patients participated in at least one of 1,934 virtual prenatal care visits. Prenatal visits were more likely to be conducted through telehealth for patients who were older than 25 years old and lived in rural areas. In addition, patients who were with type 2 diabetes were more likely to use telehealth in their prenatal care (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 7.247 [95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 4.244 – 12.933]). By contrast, patients from racial and ethnic minority groups were less likely to have a telehealth encounter compared to white or non-Hispanic patients (aOR 0.603 [95% CI 0.465 – 0.778] and aOR 0.663 [95% CI 0.471 – 0.927], respectively). Additionally, patients who were on state-level Medicaid were less likely to use telehealth (aOR 0.495 [95% CI 0.402 – 0.608]). \nDiscussion: Disparities in telehealth use for prenatal care suggest further investigations into access barriers. Hispanic patients who had low English language proficiency may not willing to see doctors via virtual care. Availability of high-speed internet and/or hardware may hold these patients who were insured through state-level Medicaid back due to poverty. Future work is advised to minimize access barriers to telehealth in its implementation. \nConclusions: While telehealth expanded prenatal care access for childbearing women during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study suggested that there were non-trivial differences in the demographics of patients who utilized such settings.","PeriodicalId":320236,"journal":{"name":"Telehealth and Medicine Today","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prenatal Telehealth During the Pandemic: Sociodemographic and Clinical Associations\",\"authors\":\"Cheng Gao, S. Osmundson, B. Malin, You Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.30953/tmt.v6.279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives: Like other areas of care affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth (both audio and video) was rapidly adopted in the obstetric setting. We performed a retrospective analysis of electronic health record (EHR) data to characterize the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with telehealth utilization among patients who received prenatal care. \\nMaterials and Methods: The study period covered March 23rd, 2020 to July 2nd, 2020, during which time 2,521 patients received prenatal care at a large academic medical center. We applied a generalized logistic regression to measure the relationship between the patients’ sociodemographic factors (in terms of age, race, ethnicity, urbanization level, and insurance type), pregnancy complications (namely, type 2 diabetes, chronic hypertension, and fetal growth restriction), and telehealth usage, as documented in the EHR. \\nResults: During the study period, 2,521 patients had 16,516 prenatal care visits. 938 (37.2%) of the patients participated in at least one of 1,934 virtual prenatal care visits. Prenatal visits were more likely to be conducted through telehealth for patients who were older than 25 years old and lived in rural areas. In addition, patients who were with type 2 diabetes were more likely to use telehealth in their prenatal care (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 7.247 [95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 4.244 – 12.933]). By contrast, patients from racial and ethnic minority groups were less likely to have a telehealth encounter compared to white or non-Hispanic patients (aOR 0.603 [95% CI 0.465 – 0.778] and aOR 0.663 [95% CI 0.471 – 0.927], respectively). Additionally, patients who were on state-level Medicaid were less likely to use telehealth (aOR 0.495 [95% CI 0.402 – 0.608]). \\nDiscussion: Disparities in telehealth use for prenatal care suggest further investigations into access barriers. Hispanic patients who had low English language proficiency may not willing to see doctors via virtual care. Availability of high-speed internet and/or hardware may hold these patients who were insured through state-level Medicaid back due to poverty. Future work is advised to minimize access barriers to telehealth in its implementation. \\nConclusions: While telehealth expanded prenatal care access for childbearing women during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study suggested that there were non-trivial differences in the demographics of patients who utilized such settings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":320236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Telehealth and Medicine Today\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Telehealth and Medicine Today\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30953/tmt.v6.279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telehealth and Medicine Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30953/tmt.v6.279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
目标:与受COVID-19大流行影响的其他护理领域一样,产科环境迅速采用了远程医疗(音频和视频)。我们对电子健康记录(EHR)数据进行了回顾性分析,以表征接受产前护理的患者中与远程医疗利用相关的社会人口统计学和临床因素。材料与方法:研究时间为2020年3月23日至2020年7月2日,2521例患者在某大型学术医疗中心接受产前护理。我们应用广义逻辑回归来衡量患者的社会人口因素(年龄、种族、民族、城市化水平和保险类型)、妊娠并发症(即2型糖尿病、慢性高血压和胎儿生长受限)和远程医疗使用之间的关系,这些都记录在电子病历中。结果:在研究期间,2521名患者进行了16516次产前护理。938名(37.2%)患者至少参加了1934次虚拟产前护理访问中的一次。25岁以上、居住在农村地区的患者更有可能通过远程保健进行产前检查。此外,2型糖尿病患者更倾向于在产前护理中使用远程医疗(调整优势比(aOR) 7.247[95%可信区间(95% CI) 4.244 - 12.933])。相比之下,与白人或非西班牙裔患者相比,种族和少数民族患者更不可能有远程医疗就诊(aOR分别为0.603 [95% CI 0.465 - 0.778]和0.663 [95% CI 0.471 - 0.927])。此外,接受州级医疗补助的患者更不可能使用远程医疗(比值比0.495 [95% CI 0.402 - 0.608])。讨论:远程保健用于产前护理的差异建议进一步调查获取障碍。英语水平较低的西班牙裔患者可能不愿意通过虚拟护理去看医生。高速互联网和/或硬件的可用性可能会使这些通过州一级医疗补助计划获得保险的患者因贫困而退缩。建议今后的工作在实施过程中尽量减少获取远程保健的障碍。结论:虽然远程医疗在COVID-19大流行期间扩大了育龄妇女的产前护理机会,但本研究表明,利用这种环境的患者的人口统计数据存在重大差异。
Prenatal Telehealth During the Pandemic: Sociodemographic and Clinical Associations
Objectives: Like other areas of care affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth (both audio and video) was rapidly adopted in the obstetric setting. We performed a retrospective analysis of electronic health record (EHR) data to characterize the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with telehealth utilization among patients who received prenatal care.
Materials and Methods: The study period covered March 23rd, 2020 to July 2nd, 2020, during which time 2,521 patients received prenatal care at a large academic medical center. We applied a generalized logistic regression to measure the relationship between the patients’ sociodemographic factors (in terms of age, race, ethnicity, urbanization level, and insurance type), pregnancy complications (namely, type 2 diabetes, chronic hypertension, and fetal growth restriction), and telehealth usage, as documented in the EHR.
Results: During the study period, 2,521 patients had 16,516 prenatal care visits. 938 (37.2%) of the patients participated in at least one of 1,934 virtual prenatal care visits. Prenatal visits were more likely to be conducted through telehealth for patients who were older than 25 years old and lived in rural areas. In addition, patients who were with type 2 diabetes were more likely to use telehealth in their prenatal care (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 7.247 [95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) 4.244 – 12.933]). By contrast, patients from racial and ethnic minority groups were less likely to have a telehealth encounter compared to white or non-Hispanic patients (aOR 0.603 [95% CI 0.465 – 0.778] and aOR 0.663 [95% CI 0.471 – 0.927], respectively). Additionally, patients who were on state-level Medicaid were less likely to use telehealth (aOR 0.495 [95% CI 0.402 – 0.608]).
Discussion: Disparities in telehealth use for prenatal care suggest further investigations into access barriers. Hispanic patients who had low English language proficiency may not willing to see doctors via virtual care. Availability of high-speed internet and/or hardware may hold these patients who were insured through state-level Medicaid back due to poverty. Future work is advised to minimize access barriers to telehealth in its implementation.
Conclusions: While telehealth expanded prenatal care access for childbearing women during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study suggested that there were non-trivial differences in the demographics of patients who utilized such settings.