Annie E Larson, Kurt C Stange, John Heintzman, Whitney E Zahnd, Melinda M Davis, S Marie Harvey
{"title":"安全网诊所病人的视频与音频远程保健:不同地区和不同时间的变化。","authors":"Annie E Larson, Kurt C Stange, John Heintzman, Whitney E Zahnd, Melinda M Davis, S Marie Harvey","doi":"10.1111/jrh.12887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding the mix of video versus audio telehealth modality is critical to informing care for low-income safety net clinic patients. Our study examined whether telehealth modality and continued use of telehealth varied by rurality and whether that changed over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Encounters from adults in the OCHIN national network of primary care safety net clinics were identified by encounter type (in-person vs telehealth) and telehealth modality (video vs audio) from 4/1/2021 to 3/31/2023. Our main outcome was an interaction between patient rurality (defined using Rural Urban Commuting Area codes) and time. Linear probability models with clinic fixed effects were used to estimate predicted probabilities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The predicted probability of a telehealth visit decreased from 37.9% to 24.7% among urban patients (P <.001) and remained stable (29.5%-29.8%; P = .82) among patients in small rural areas. By March 2023, telehealth use among patients in small rural areas was 5.1 percentage points higher than among urban patients (P = .02). The predicted probability of an audio-only visit ranged from 63.5% to 70.5% for patients across all levels of rurality, but no significant differences by rurality or time were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Safety net clinic patients were more likely to use audio-only than video telehealth visits. Telehealth in urban and large rural areas decreased since the first year of the pandemic. By the end of the study, patients in small rural communities used significantly more telehealth than urban patients. Elimination of reimbursement for audio telehealth visits may exacerbate existing health care inequities.</p>","PeriodicalId":50060,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rural Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Video versus audio telehealth in safety net clinic patients: Changes by rurality and time.\",\"authors\":\"Annie E Larson, Kurt C Stange, John Heintzman, Whitney E Zahnd, Melinda M Davis, S Marie Harvey\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jrh.12887\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding the mix of video versus audio telehealth modality is critical to informing care for low-income safety net clinic patients. Our study examined whether telehealth modality and continued use of telehealth varied by rurality and whether that changed over time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Encounters from adults in the OCHIN national network of primary care safety net clinics were identified by encounter type (in-person vs telehealth) and telehealth modality (video vs audio) from 4/1/2021 to 3/31/2023. Our main outcome was an interaction between patient rurality (defined using Rural Urban Commuting Area codes) and time. Linear probability models with clinic fixed effects were used to estimate predicted probabilities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The predicted probability of a telehealth visit decreased from 37.9% to 24.7% among urban patients (P <.001) and remained stable (29.5%-29.8%; P = .82) among patients in small rural areas. By March 2023, telehealth use among patients in small rural areas was 5.1 percentage points higher than among urban patients (P = .02). The predicted probability of an audio-only visit ranged from 63.5% to 70.5% for patients across all levels of rurality, but no significant differences by rurality or time were found.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Safety net clinic patients were more likely to use audio-only than video telehealth visits. Telehealth in urban and large rural areas decreased since the first year of the pandemic. By the end of the study, patients in small rural communities used significantly more telehealth than urban patients. Elimination of reimbursement for audio telehealth visits may exacerbate existing health care inequities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rural Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rural Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12887\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12887","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Video versus audio telehealth in safety net clinic patients: Changes by rurality and time.
Background: Understanding the mix of video versus audio telehealth modality is critical to informing care for low-income safety net clinic patients. Our study examined whether telehealth modality and continued use of telehealth varied by rurality and whether that changed over time.
Methods: Encounters from adults in the OCHIN national network of primary care safety net clinics were identified by encounter type (in-person vs telehealth) and telehealth modality (video vs audio) from 4/1/2021 to 3/31/2023. Our main outcome was an interaction between patient rurality (defined using Rural Urban Commuting Area codes) and time. Linear probability models with clinic fixed effects were used to estimate predicted probabilities.
Results: The predicted probability of a telehealth visit decreased from 37.9% to 24.7% among urban patients (P <.001) and remained stable (29.5%-29.8%; P = .82) among patients in small rural areas. By March 2023, telehealth use among patients in small rural areas was 5.1 percentage points higher than among urban patients (P = .02). The predicted probability of an audio-only visit ranged from 63.5% to 70.5% for patients across all levels of rurality, but no significant differences by rurality or time were found.
Conclusions: Safety net clinic patients were more likely to use audio-only than video telehealth visits. Telehealth in urban and large rural areas decreased since the first year of the pandemic. By the end of the study, patients in small rural communities used significantly more telehealth than urban patients. Elimination of reimbursement for audio telehealth visits may exacerbate existing health care inequities.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Rural Health, a quarterly journal published by the NRHA, offers a variety of original research relevant and important to rural health. Some examples include evaluations, case studies, and analyses related to health status and behavior, as well as to health work force, policy and access issues. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies are welcome. Highest priority is given to manuscripts that reflect scholarly quality, demonstrate methodological rigor, and emphasize practical implications. The journal also publishes articles with an international rural health perspective, commentaries, book reviews and letters.