减少不就诊和就医不平等:远程医疗的影响。

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1177/1357633X241241357
Connie C Shao, Meghna H Katta, Burke P Smith, Bayley A Jones, Lauren T Gleason, Alizeh Abbas, Nikita Wadhwani, Eric L Wallace, Michael J Mugavero, Daniel I Chu
{"title":"减少不就诊和就医不平等:远程医疗的影响。","authors":"Connie C Shao, Meghna H Katta, Burke P Smith, Bayley A Jones, Lauren T Gleason, Alizeh Abbas, Nikita Wadhwani, Eric L Wallace, Michael J Mugavero, Daniel I Chu","doi":"10.1177/1357633X241241357","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>No-show visits have serious consequences for patients, providers, and healthcare systems as they lead to delays in care, increased costs, and reduced access to services. Telemedicine has emerged as a promising alternative to in-person visits by reducing travel barriers, but risks exacerbating the digital divide. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of telemedicine (video and phone) at a tertiary care academic center on no-show visits compared to in-person visits.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort analysis of all weekday clinic visits among in-state adult patients at a single tertiary care center in the southeast from January 2020 to April 2023 was performed. Rates of no-show visits for patients who were seen via phone and video were compared with those who were seen in-person. Demographic and clinical characteristics of these groups were also compared, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and visit type. The primary outcome was the rate of no-show visits for each visit type.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis included 3,105,382 scheduled appointments, of which 81.2% were in-person, 13.4% via video, and 5.4% via phone calls. Compared to in-person visits, phone calls and video visits reduced the odds of no-show visits by 50% (aOR 0.5, CI 0.49-0.51) and 15% (aOR 0.85, CI 0.84-0.86), respectively. Older patients, Black patients, patients furthest from clinic, and patients from counties with the greatest degree of vulnerability and disparities in digital access were more likely to use phone visits. No-shows were more common among non-white, male, and younger patients from counties with lower socioeconomic status.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Telemedicine effectively reduced no-show visits. However, limiting telemedicine to video-based visits only exacerbated disparities in access. Phone calls allow historically underserved patients from lower socioeconomic backgrounds to access healthcare and should be included within the definition of telemedicine.</p>","PeriodicalId":50024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","volume":" ","pages":"1357633X241241357"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reducing no-show visits and disparities in access: The impact of telemedicine.\",\"authors\":\"Connie C Shao, Meghna H Katta, Burke P Smith, Bayley A Jones, Lauren T Gleason, Alizeh Abbas, Nikita Wadhwani, Eric L Wallace, Michael J Mugavero, Daniel I Chu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1357633X241241357\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>No-show visits have serious consequences for patients, providers, and healthcare systems as they lead to delays in care, increased costs, and reduced access to services. Telemedicine has emerged as a promising alternative to in-person visits by reducing travel barriers, but risks exacerbating the digital divide. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of telemedicine (video and phone) at a tertiary care academic center on no-show visits compared to in-person visits.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort analysis of all weekday clinic visits among in-state adult patients at a single tertiary care center in the southeast from January 2020 to April 2023 was performed. Rates of no-show visits for patients who were seen via phone and video were compared with those who were seen in-person. Demographic and clinical characteristics of these groups were also compared, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and visit type. The primary outcome was the rate of no-show visits for each visit type.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis included 3,105,382 scheduled appointments, of which 81.2% were in-person, 13.4% via video, and 5.4% via phone calls. Compared to in-person visits, phone calls and video visits reduced the odds of no-show visits by 50% (aOR 0.5, CI 0.49-0.51) and 15% (aOR 0.85, CI 0.84-0.86), respectively. Older patients, Black patients, patients furthest from clinic, and patients from counties with the greatest degree of vulnerability and disparities in digital access were more likely to use phone visits. No-shows were more common among non-white, male, and younger patients from counties with lower socioeconomic status.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Telemedicine effectively reduced no-show visits. However, limiting telemedicine to video-based visits only exacerbated disparities in access. Phone calls allow historically underserved patients from lower socioeconomic backgrounds to access healthcare and should be included within the definition of telemedicine.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1357633X241241357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X241241357\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X241241357","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:未到场就诊对患者、医疗服务提供者和医疗保健系统都会造成严重后果,因为它们会导致医疗服务延误、成本增加以及获得服务的机会减少。远程医疗减少了旅行障碍,是一种很有前途的替代亲自就诊的方法,但有可能加剧数字鸿沟。本研究的目的是评估远程医疗(视频和电话)在一家三级医疗学术中心对未到医院就诊的影响:对 2020 年 1 月至 2023 年 4 月期间东南部一家三级医疗中心的所有州内成年患者的工作日门诊进行了回顾性队列分析。对通过电话和视频就诊的患者与亲自就诊的患者的未就诊率进行了比较。同时还比较了这两组患者的人口统计学特征和临床特征,包括年龄、性别、种族/民族、社会经济地位和就诊类型。主要结果是每种就诊类型的未就诊率:我们的分析包括 3,105,382 次预约,其中 81.2% 是面诊,13.4% 通过视频,5.4% 通过电话。与面对面就诊相比,电话和视频就诊分别降低了 50%(aOR 0.5,CI 0.49-0.51)和 15%(aOR 0.85,CI 0.84-0.86)的未就诊几率。年龄较大的患者、黑人患者、距离诊所最远的患者以及来自最脆弱和数字访问不均衡的县的患者更有可能使用电话就诊。在非白人、男性和来自社会经济地位较低的县的年轻患者中,不就诊的情况更为普遍:结论:远程医疗有效地减少了不就诊率。然而,将远程医疗限制在视频就诊只会加剧就诊机会的不均等。电话可让社会经济地位较低的病人获得医疗保健服务,应将其纳入远程医疗的定义范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Reducing no-show visits and disparities in access: The impact of telemedicine.

Background: No-show visits have serious consequences for patients, providers, and healthcare systems as they lead to delays in care, increased costs, and reduced access to services. Telemedicine has emerged as a promising alternative to in-person visits by reducing travel barriers, but risks exacerbating the digital divide. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of telemedicine (video and phone) at a tertiary care academic center on no-show visits compared to in-person visits.

Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis of all weekday clinic visits among in-state adult patients at a single tertiary care center in the southeast from January 2020 to April 2023 was performed. Rates of no-show visits for patients who were seen via phone and video were compared with those who were seen in-person. Demographic and clinical characteristics of these groups were also compared, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and visit type. The primary outcome was the rate of no-show visits for each visit type.

Results: Our analysis included 3,105,382 scheduled appointments, of which 81.2% were in-person, 13.4% via video, and 5.4% via phone calls. Compared to in-person visits, phone calls and video visits reduced the odds of no-show visits by 50% (aOR 0.5, CI 0.49-0.51) and 15% (aOR 0.85, CI 0.84-0.86), respectively. Older patients, Black patients, patients furthest from clinic, and patients from counties with the greatest degree of vulnerability and disparities in digital access were more likely to use phone visits. No-shows were more common among non-white, male, and younger patients from counties with lower socioeconomic status.

Conclusion: Telemedicine effectively reduced no-show visits. However, limiting telemedicine to video-based visits only exacerbated disparities in access. Phone calls allow historically underserved patients from lower socioeconomic backgrounds to access healthcare and should be included within the definition of telemedicine.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
174
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare provides excellent peer reviewed coverage of developments in telemedicine and e-health and is now widely recognised as the leading journal in its field. Contributions from around the world provide a unique perspective on how different countries and health systems are using new technology in health care. Sections within the journal include technology updates, editorials, original articles, research tutorials, educational material, review articles and reports from various telemedicine organisations. A subscription to this journal will help you to stay up-to-date in this fast moving and growing area of medicine.
期刊最新文献
Satisfaction with videoconference-delivered CBT provided as part of a blended treatment approach for children and adolescents with mental disorders and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic: A follow-up survey among caregivers and therapists. Ear Portal: An urban-based ear, nose, and throat, and audiology referral telehealth portal to improve access to specialist ear health services for children. The Congenital Cardiology Cloud: Proof of feasibility of Germany's first tele-medical network for pediatric cardiology. Care trajectories for patients utilizing electronic visits for COVID-like symptoms in a large healthcare delivery system: May 2020-December 2021. Knowledge, perceptions, and readiness of telepharmacy (KPR-TP) questionnaire among pharmacists: Development and psychometric evaluation.
×
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