Cross-Sectional Association of Patient Language and Patient-Provider Language Concordance with Video Telemedicine Use Among Patients with Limited English Proficiency.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine's dramatic increase during the COVID-19 pandemic elevates the importance of addressing patient-care gaps in telemedicine, especially for patients with limited English proficiency. OBJECTIVE: To examine the associations of patient language and patient-provider language concordance with telemedicine visit type (video versus telephone visit). DESIGN: Cross-sectional automated data study of patient-scheduled primary care telemedicine appointments from March 16, 2020, to October 31, 2020. SETTING: Northern California integrated healthcare delivery system. PARTICIPANTS: All 22,427 completed primary care telemedicine visits scheduled by 13,764 patients with limited English proficiency via the patient portal. MEASUREMENTS: Cross-sectional association of electronic health record-documented patient language (Spanish as referent) and patient-provider language concordance with patients' choice of a video (versus telephone) visit, accounting for patient sociodemographics, technology access, and technology familiarity factors. RESULTS: Of all patient-scheduled visits, 34.5% (n = 7747) were video visits. The top three patient languages were Spanish (42.4%), Cantonese (16.9%), and Mandarin (10.3%). Adjusting for sociodemographic and technology access and familiarity factors and compared to patients speaking Spanish, video visit use was higher among patients speaking Cantonese (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.18-1.52), Mandarin (OR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.16-1.52), or Vietnamese (OR = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.09-1.47), but lower among patients speaking Punjabi (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.62-0.91). Language concordance was associated with lower video visit use (OR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.80-0.93) and moderated associations of speaking Spanish, Cantonese, and Korean with video visit use. In addition, for all language groups, those with prior video visit use were more likely to re-use video visits compared to those with no prior use (p < .05 for all languages except Hindi with p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Among linguistically diverse patients with limited English proficiency, video telemedicine use differed by specific language. Disaggregating patient subpopulation data is necessary for identifying those at greatest risk of being negatively impacted by the digital divide.

Primary care telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic: patient's choice of video versus telephone visit.

The aim of this study is to examine the association between patient characteristics and primary care telemedicine choice among integrated delivery system patients self-scheduling visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used multivariate logistic regression to examine the association between the choice of video versus telephone and patient sociodemographic characteristics and technology access among patient-initiated primary care telemedicine visits scheduled online from March to October 2020. Among 978 272 patient-scheduled primary care telemedicine visits, 39% were video visits. Patients of Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity, or living in low socioeconomic status or low internet access neighborhoods were less likely to schedule video visits. Patients 65 years or older, with prior video visit experience or mobile portal access, or visiting their own personal provider were more likely to schedule video visits. While video adoption was substantial in all patient groups examined, differences in telemedicine choice suggest the persistence of a digital divide, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a telephone telemedicine option.

Clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients evaluated in the emergency department: A retrospective cohort study of 801 cases.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has extracted devastating tolls. Despite its pervasiveness, robust information on disease characteristics in the emergency department (ED) and how that information predicts clinical course remain limited. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of the first ED visit from SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in our health system, from February 21, 2020 to April 5, 2020. We reviewed each patient's ED visit(s) and included the first visit with symptoms consistent with COVID-19. We collected demographic, clinical, and treatment variables from electronic health records and structured manual chart review. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between patient characteristics and 2 primary outcomes: a critical outcome and hospitalization from index visit. Our critical outcome was defined as death or advanced respiratory support (high flow nasal cannula or greater) within 21 days. RESULTS: Of the first 1030 encounters, 801 met our inclusion criteria: 15% were over age 75 years, 47% were female, and 24% were non-Hispanic white. We found 161 (20%) had a critical outcome and 393 (49%) were hospitalized. Independent predictors of a critical outcome included a history of hypertension, abnormal chest x-ray, elevated neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio, elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN), measured fever, and abnormal respiratory vital signs (respiratory rate, oxygen saturation). Independent predictors of hospitalization included abnormal pulmonary auscultation, elevated BUN, measured fever, and abnormal respiratory vital signs. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, diverse study of ED patients with COVID-19, we have identified numerous clinical characteristics that have independent associations with critical illness and hospitalization.