Telemedicine Use across Medical Specialties and Diagnoses.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic rapidly expanded telemedicine scale and scope. As telemedicine becomes routine, understanding how specialty and diagnosis combine with demographics to impact telemedicine use will aid in addressing its current limitations. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the relationship between medical specialty, diagnosis, and telemedicine use, and their interplay with patient demographics in determining telemedicine usage patterns. METHODS: We extracted encounter and patient data of all adults who scheduled outpatient visits from June 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021 from the electronic health record of an integrated academic health system encompassing a broad range of subspecialties. Extracted variables included medical specialty, primary visit diagnosis, visit modality (video, audio, or in-person), and patient age, sex, self-reported race/ethnicity and 2013 rural-urban continuum code. Six specialties (General Surgery, Family Medicine, Gastroenterology, Oncology, General Internal Medicine, and Psychiatry) ranging from the lowest to the highest quartile of telemedicine use (video and audio) were chosen for analysis. Relative proportions of video, audio, and in-person modalities were compared. We examined diagnoses associated with the most and least frequent telemedicine use within each specialty. Finally, we analyzed associations between patient characteristics and telemedicine modality (video vs. audio/in-person, and video/audio vs. in-person) using a mixed-effects logistic regression model. RESULTS: A total of 2,494,296 encounters occurred during the study period, representing 420,876 unique patients (mean age: 44 years, standard deviation: 24 years, 54% female). Medical diagnoses requiring physical examination or minor procedures were more likely to be conducted in-person. Rural patients were more likely than urban patients to use video telemedicine in General Surgery and Gastroenterology and less likely to use video for all other specialties. Within most specialties, male patients and patients of nonwhite race were overall less likely to use video modality and video/audio telemedicine. In Psychiatry, members of several demographic groups used video telemedicine more commonly than expected, while in other specialties, members of these groups tended to use less telemedicine overall. CONCLUSION: Medical diagnoses requiring physical examination or minor procedures are more likely to be conducted in-person. Patient characteristics (age, sex, rural vs. urban, race/ethnicity) affect video and video/audio telemedicine use differently depending on medical specialty. These factors contribute to a unique clinical scenario which impacts perceived usefulness and accessibility of telemedicine to providers and patients, and are likely to impact rates of telemedicine adoption.

Oncologist Perspectives on Telemedicine for Patients With Cancer: A National Comprehensive Cancer Network Survey.

PURPOSE: The use of telemedicine expanded dramatically in March 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to assess oncologist perspectives on telemedicine's present and future roles (both phone and video) for patients with cancer. METHODS: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Electronic Health Record (EHR) Oncology Advisory Group formed a Workgroup to assess the state of oncology telemedicine and created a 20-question survey. NCCN EHR Oncology Advisory Group members e-mailed the survey to providers (surgical, hematology, gynecologic, medical, and radiation oncology physicians and clinicians) at their home institution. RESULTS: Providers (N = 1,038) from 26 institutions responded in Summer 2020. Telemedicine (phone and video) was compared with in-person visits across clinical scenarios (n = 766). For reviewing benign follow-up data, 88% reported video and 80% reported telephone were the same as or better than office visits. For establishing a personal connection with patients, 24% and 7% indicated video and telephone, respectively, were the same as or better than office visits. Ninety-three percent reported adverse outcomes attributable to telemedicine visits never or rarely occurred, whereas 6% indicated they occasionally occurred (n = 801). Respondents (n = 796) estimated 46% of postpandemic visits could be virtual, but challenges included (1) lack of patient access to technology, (2) inadequate clinical workflows to support telemedicine, and (3) insurance coverage uncertainty postpandemic. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine appears effective across a variety of clinical scenarios. Based on provider assessment, a substantial fraction of visits for patients with cancer could be effectively and safely conducted using telemedicine. These findings should influence regulatory and infrastructural decisions regarding telemedicine postpandemic for patients with cancer.

Disparities in Telemedicine Access: A Cross-Sectional Study of a Newly Established Infrastructure during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to dramatic increases in telemedicine use to provide outpatient care without in-person contact risks. Telemedicine increases options for health care access, but a "digital divide" of disparate access may prevent certain populations from realizing the benefits of telemedicine. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to understand telemedicine utilization patterns after a widespread deployment to identify potential disparities exacerbated by expanded telemedicine usage. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional retrospective analysis of adults who scheduled outpatient visits between June 1, 2020 and August 31, 2020 at a single-integrated academic health system encompassing a broad range of subspecialties and a large geographic region in the Upper Midwest, during a period of time after the initial surge of COVID-19 when most standard clinical services had resumed. At the beginning of this study period, approximately 72% of provider visits were telemedicine visits. The primary study outcome was whether a patient had one or more video-based visits, compared with audio-only (telephone) visits or in-person visits only. The secondary outcome was whether a patient had any telemedicine visits (video-based or audio-only), compared with in-person visits only. RESULTS: A total of 197,076 individuals were eligible (average age = 46 years, 56% females). Increasing age, rural status, Asian or Black/African American race, Hispanic ethnicity, and self-pay/uninsured status were significantly negatively associated with having a video visit. Digital literacy, measured by patient portal activation status, was significantly positively associated with having a video visit, as were Medicaid or Medicare as payer and American Indian/Alaskan Native race. CONCLUSION: Our findings reinforce previous evidence that older age, rural status, lower socioeconomic status, Asian race, Black/African American race, and Hispanic/Latino ethnicity are associated with lower rates of video-based telemedicine use. Health systems and policies should seek to mitigate such barriers to telemedicine when possible, with efforts such as digital literacy outreach and equitable distribution of telemedicine infrastructure.