网络医疗系统中远程医疗实施及就诊方式对高危产科门诊失诊率的影响

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Telemedicine and e-Health Pub Date : 2024-12-11 DOI:10.1089/tmj.2024.0431
Elaine C Khoong, Magdalene Kuznia, Kelcie Marie T Rodriguez, Melissa M Gosdin, Jennifer N Juarez Yoc, Lina Tieu, Ben Li, Misa Perron-Burdick, George Su, Malini Nijagal, Courtney R Lyles
{"title":"网络医疗系统中远程医疗实施及就诊方式对高危产科门诊失诊率的影响","authors":"Elaine C Khoong, Magdalene Kuznia, Kelcie Marie T Rodriguez, Melissa M Gosdin, Jennifer N Juarez Yoc, Lina Tieu, Ben Li, Misa Perron-Burdick, George Su, Malini Nijagal, Courtney R Lyles","doi":"10.1089/tmj.2024.0431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Few studies have explored patient choice of visit modality between in-person, video, and telephone for prenatal care where exams are viewed as core to care and how this choice impacts no-show rate. This study evaluated the association between choice of visit modality and prenatal care visit attendance. <b>Methods:</b> In this observational (July 2020-June 2022) mixed methods study of an urban safety-net obstetrics clinic, we collected sociodemographic traits, telemedicine eligibility (as determined by a clinician), choice of visit modality (in-person, telephone, and video), and visit completion status. Using logistic regression analysis, we evaluated associations between sociodemographic traits, telemedicine eligibility, and visit modality with visit completion among all visits and only telemedicine-eligible visits. We interviewed patients and used thematic analysis to explore reasons for choosing a telemedicine visit and their visit experience. <b>Results:</b> Of 504 participants, there were 1,311 visits and 554 telemedicine-eligible visits. The no-show rate was 11.3% (148/1,311) among all visits and 14.1% (78/554) in telemedicine-eligible visits. Only phone visits were associated with higher odds of no-shows (vs. in-person visits) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10, 4.98) among all visits and telemedicine-eligible visits (aOR = 2.40; 95% CI: 1.09, 5.27). In 20 patient interviews, patients reported choosing telephone visits when the reason for the visit was perceived as less serious or if they had competing obligations. <b>Discussion:</b> Inconsistent with prior literature, we found higher no-show rates for phone visits, potentially because phone visits are chosen by patients who view their visit as lower priority. More research is needed to understand how telemedicine impacts disparities in prenatal care.</p>","PeriodicalId":54434,"journal":{"name":"Telemedicine and e-Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Telehealth Implementation and Visit Modality on No-Show Rate in a High-Risk Obstetrics Clinic in a Safety Net Healthcare System.\",\"authors\":\"Elaine C Khoong, Magdalene Kuznia, Kelcie Marie T Rodriguez, Melissa M Gosdin, Jennifer N Juarez Yoc, Lina Tieu, Ben Li, Misa Perron-Burdick, George Su, Malini Nijagal, Courtney R Lyles\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/tmj.2024.0431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Introduction:</b> Few studies have explored patient choice of visit modality between in-person, video, and telephone for prenatal care where exams are viewed as core to care and how this choice impacts no-show rate. This study evaluated the association between choice of visit modality and prenatal care visit attendance. <b>Methods:</b> In this observational (July 2020-June 2022) mixed methods study of an urban safety-net obstetrics clinic, we collected sociodemographic traits, telemedicine eligibility (as determined by a clinician), choice of visit modality (in-person, telephone, and video), and visit completion status. Using logistic regression analysis, we evaluated associations between sociodemographic traits, telemedicine eligibility, and visit modality with visit completion among all visits and only telemedicine-eligible visits. We interviewed patients and used thematic analysis to explore reasons for choosing a telemedicine visit and their visit experience. <b>Results:</b> Of 504 participants, there were 1,311 visits and 554 telemedicine-eligible visits. The no-show rate was 11.3% (148/1,311) among all visits and 14.1% (78/554) in telemedicine-eligible visits. Only phone visits were associated with higher odds of no-shows (vs. in-person visits) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10, 4.98) among all visits and telemedicine-eligible visits (aOR = 2.40; 95% CI: 1.09, 5.27). In 20 patient interviews, patients reported choosing telephone visits when the reason for the visit was perceived as less serious or if they had competing obligations. <b>Discussion:</b> Inconsistent with prior literature, we found higher no-show rates for phone visits, potentially because phone visits are chosen by patients who view their visit as lower priority. More research is needed to understand how telemedicine impacts disparities in prenatal care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Telemedicine and e-Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Telemedicine and e-Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2024.0431\",\"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":"Telemedicine and e-Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2024.0431","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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:很少有研究探讨了患者在产前检查中选择面对面、视频和电话的访问方式,这些检查被视为护理的核心,以及这种选择如何影响缺勤率。本研究评估了访问方式的选择与产前护理访问出勤率之间的关系。方法:在这项观察性研究(2020年7月- 2022年6月)中,我们收集了一个城市安全网产科诊所的社会人口统计学特征、远程医疗资格(由临床医生确定)、就诊方式的选择(面对面、电话和视频)和就诊完成情况。使用逻辑回归分析,我们评估了社会人口学特征、远程医疗资格和就诊方式与所有就诊和仅远程医疗合格就诊的就诊完成之间的关系。我们采访了患者,并使用主题分析来探讨选择远程医疗就诊的原因和他们的就诊体验。结果:在504名参与者中,有1311次就诊和554次符合远程医疗条件的就诊。在所有就诊中,缺席率为11.3%(148/ 1311),在符合远程医疗条件的就诊中为14.1%(78/554)。只有电话就诊与更高的不来就诊的几率相关(与亲自就诊相比)(调整后的优势比[aOR] = 2.34;95%可信区间[CI]: 1.10, 4.98),包括所有就诊和符合远程医疗条件的就诊(aOR = 2.40;95% ci: 1.09, 5.27)。在对20名患者的采访中,患者报告说,当就诊的原因被认为不那么严重或他们有相互竞争的义务时,他们会选择电话就诊。讨论:与先前的文献不一致,我们发现电话就诊的失诊率更高,可能是因为认为电话就诊优先级较低的患者选择了电话就诊。需要更多的研究来了解远程医疗如何影响产前护理的差异。
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
The Impact of Telehealth Implementation and Visit Modality on No-Show Rate in a High-Risk Obstetrics Clinic in a Safety Net Healthcare System.

Introduction: Few studies have explored patient choice of visit modality between in-person, video, and telephone for prenatal care where exams are viewed as core to care and how this choice impacts no-show rate. This study evaluated the association between choice of visit modality and prenatal care visit attendance. Methods: In this observational (July 2020-June 2022) mixed methods study of an urban safety-net obstetrics clinic, we collected sociodemographic traits, telemedicine eligibility (as determined by a clinician), choice of visit modality (in-person, telephone, and video), and visit completion status. Using logistic regression analysis, we evaluated associations between sociodemographic traits, telemedicine eligibility, and visit modality with visit completion among all visits and only telemedicine-eligible visits. We interviewed patients and used thematic analysis to explore reasons for choosing a telemedicine visit and their visit experience. Results: Of 504 participants, there were 1,311 visits and 554 telemedicine-eligible visits. The no-show rate was 11.3% (148/1,311) among all visits and 14.1% (78/554) in telemedicine-eligible visits. Only phone visits were associated with higher odds of no-shows (vs. in-person visits) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10, 4.98) among all visits and telemedicine-eligible visits (aOR = 2.40; 95% CI: 1.09, 5.27). In 20 patient interviews, patients reported choosing telephone visits when the reason for the visit was perceived as less serious or if they had competing obligations. Discussion: Inconsistent with prior literature, we found higher no-show rates for phone visits, potentially because phone visits are chosen by patients who view their visit as lower priority. More research is needed to understand how telemedicine impacts disparities in prenatal care.

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
Telemedicine and e-Health
Telemedicine and e-Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
6.40%
发文量
270
审稿时长
2.3 months
期刊介绍: Telemedicine and e-Health is the leading peer-reviewed journal for cutting-edge telemedicine applications for achieving optimal patient care and outcomes. It places special emphasis on the impact of telemedicine on the quality, cost effectiveness, and access to healthcare. Telemedicine applications play an increasingly important role in health care. They offer indispensable tools for home healthcare, remote patient monitoring, and disease management, not only for rural health and battlefield care, but also for nursing home, assisted living facilities, and maritime and aviation settings. Telemedicine and e-Health offers timely coverage of the advances in technology that offer practitioners, medical centers, and hospitals new and innovative options for managing patient care, electronic records, and medical billing.
期刊最新文献
When Are Single Reader Evaluations Insufficient in Teledermoscopic Assessments? Analyses of a Retrospective Cohort Study. Same as It Ever Was. A Systematic Review of Telemedicine Solutions to Provide Psychological Interventions for Women Receiving Fertility Treatments. Experience of The National Emergency Tele-Critical Care Network. Post-Telemedicine Acute Care for Undifferentiated High-Acuity Conditions: Is a Picture Worth a Thousand Words?
×
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