Pediatric Telehealth Use in U.S. Emergency Departments in 2019.

Objectives: Little is known about the recent usage of pediatric telehealth across all emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. Building upon our prior work, we aimed to characterize the usage of ED pediatric telehealth in the pre-COVID-19 era. Methods: The 2019 National ED Inventory-USA survey characterized all U.S. EDs open in 2019. Among EDs reporting receipt of pediatric telehealth services, we selected a random sample (n = 130) for a second survey on pediatric telehealth usage (2019 ED Pediatric Telehealth Survey). We also recontacted a random sample of EDs that responded to a prior, similar 2017 ED Pediatric Telehealth Survey (n = 107), for a total of 237 EDs in the 2019 ED Pediatric Telehealth Survey sample. Results: Overall, 193 (81%) of the 237 EDs responded to the 2019 Pediatric Telehealth Survey. There were 149 responding EDs that confirmed pediatric telehealth receipt in 2019. Among these, few reported ever having a pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) physician (10%) or pediatrician (9%) available for emergency care. Although 96% of EDs reported availability of pediatric telehealth services 24 h per day, 7 days per week, the majority (60%) reported using services less than once per month and 20% reported using services every 3-4 weeks. EDs most frequently used pediatric telehealth to assist with placement and transfer coordination (91%). Conclusions: Most EDs receiving pediatric telehealth in 2019 had no PEM physician or pediatrician available. Most EDs used pediatric telehealth services infrequently. Understanding barriers to assimilation of telehealth once adopted may be important to enable improved access to pediatric emergency care expertise.

Change in Emergency Medical Services-Attended Out-of-Hospital Deliveries during COVID-19 in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted access to routine in-person prenatal care, potentially leading to higher risk of out-of-hospital deliveries. Unplanned out-of-hospital deliveries pose a substantial risk of morbidity and mortality for pregnant patients and newborns. Our objective was to determine the change in rate of emergency medical services (EMS)-attended out-of-hospital deliveries during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that COVID-19-related stay-at-home orders were associated with a higher rate of out-of-hospital deliveries during the initial wave of COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis using the 2019 and 2020 National EMS Information System datasets. We included 9-1-1 scene activations for patients 12-50 years old with out-of-hospital deliveries who were treated and transported by EMS. We calculated the weekly rate of deliveries per 100,000 EMS emergency activations each year overall, and for each census division. The interruption modeled was the enactment of stay-at-home orders, with March 25-31 selected as when most orders had been enacted. We fit ordinary least squares regression models with Newey-West standard errors to adjust for autocorrelation, testing for a change in level and slope overall and by census division. RESULTS: A total of 10,778 out-of-hospital deliveries were included, 58% (n = 6,254) in 2020. The mean weekly rate of out-of-hospital deliveries in 2019 was 29.4 per 100,000 activations (95% CI: 28.4 to 30.4) versus 33.0 (95% CI: 31.8 to 34.1) in 2020. There was an immediate increase of 6.3 deliveries per 100,000 activations (95% CI: 3.3 to 9.3) after the week of March 25-31, with a subsequent decrease of 0.3 deliveries per 100,000 per week after (95% CI: -0.4 to -0.2). There were also statistically significant immediate increases in out-of-hospital deliveries after March 25-31 in the New England, East North Central, West South Central, and Mountain divisions. CONCLUSION: EMS-attended out-of-hospital deliveries remained rare during the COVID-19 pandemic, but there was an immediate increase during the initial wave of the pandemic with evidence of geographic variation. Large-scale disruptions in the health care system may result in increases in uncommon patient presentations to EMS.

Emergency Departments' Uptake of Telehealth for Stroke Versus Pediatric Care: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth for emergency stroke care delivery (telestroke) has had widespread adoption, enabling many hospitals to obtain stroke center certification. Telehealth for pediatric emergency care has been less widely adopted. OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective was to determine whether differences in policy or certification requirements contributed to differential uptake of telestroke versus pediatric telehealth. We hypothesized that differences in financial incentives, based on differences in patient volume, prehospital routing policy, and certification requirements, contributed to differential emergency department (ED) adoption of telestroke versus pediatric telehealth. METHODS: We used the 2016 National Emergency Department Inventory-USA to identify EDs that were using telestroke and pediatric telehealth services. We surveyed all EDs using pediatric telehealth services (n=339) and a convenience sample of the 1758 EDs with telestroke services (n=366). The surveys characterized ED staffing, transfer patterns, reasons for adoption, and frequency of use. We used bivariate comparisons to examine differences in reasons for adoption and use between EDs with only telestroke services, only pediatric telehealth services, or both. RESULTS: Of the 442 EDs surveyed, 378 (85.5%) indicated use of telestroke, pediatric telehealth, or both. EDs with both services were smaller in bed size, volume, and ED attending coverage than those with only telestroke services or only pediatric telehealth services. EDs with telestroke services reported more frequent use, overall, than EDs with pediatric telehealth services: 14.1% (45/320) of EDs with telestroke services reported weekly use versus 2.9% (8/272) of EDs with pediatric telehealth services (P<.001). In addition, 37 out of 272 (13.6%) EDs with pediatric telehealth services reported no consults in the past year. Across applications, the most frequently selected reason for adoption was "improving level of clinical care." Policy-related reasons (ie, for compliance with outside certification or standards or for improving ED performance on quality metrics) were rarely indicated as the most important, but these reasons were indicated slightly more often for telestroke adoption (12/320, 3.8%) than for pediatric telehealth adoption (1/272, 0.4%; P=.003). CONCLUSIONS: In 2016, more US EDs had telestroke services than pediatric telehealth services; among EDs with the technology, consults were more frequently made for stroke than for pediatric patients. The most frequently indicated reason for adoption among all EDs was related to clinical care.

Barriers and facilitators to pediatric telehealth use in English- and Spanish-speaking families: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: With the rapid increase in telehealth use during the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns have been raised about the potential for exacerbating existing healthcare disparities in marginalized populations. While eliminating barriers such as transportation and time constraints, telehealth may introduce barriers related to technology access. With little known about the patient experience accessing telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic, this study seeks to understand the barriers and facilitators to telehealth use as well as interventions that may address them. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with parents of pediatric patients of a primary care clinic in a diverse community during the study period of March-May 2021. The interviews explored barriers and facilitators to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews were balanced across language (Spanish and English) as well as across visit type (in-person vs. telehealth). Recruitment, collection of demographic information, and interviews were conducted by telephone. The conversations were recorded and transcribed. Once thematic saturation was achieved, the data were analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Of the 33 participants, 17 (52%) spoke English and 16 (48%) spoke Spanish. A total of 17 (52%) had experienced a telehealth encounter as their first visit during the study period while 16 (48%) had an in-person visit. Five themes were identified: (1) a recognition of differences in technological knowledge and access, (2) situational preferences for telehealth versus in-person visits, (3) avoidance of COVID-19 exposure, (4) convenience, and (5) change over time. English-speaking patients expressed greater ease with and a preference for telehealth, while Spanish-speaking participants expressed more technological difficulty with telehealth and a preference for in-person visits. Suggested interventions included informational tutorials such as videos before the visit, technical support, and providing families with technological devices. CONCLUSION: In this study, we examined patient and family perspectives on pediatric telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Implementation of the suggested interventions to address barriers to telehealth use is essential to prevent further exacerbation of health disparities already experienced by marginalized populations.

Executive summary of the 2021 SAEM consensus conference: From bedside to policy: Advancing social emergency medicine and population health through research, collaboration, and education.

BACKGROUND: Social emergency medicine (social EM) examines the intersection of emergency care and the social factors that influence health outcomes. In 2021, the SAEM consensus conference focused on social EM and population health, with the goal of prioritizing research topics, creating collaborations, and advancing the field of social EM. METHODS: Organization of the conference began in 2019 within SAEM. Cochairs were identified and a planning committee created the framework for the conference. Leaders for subgroups were identified, and subgroups performed literature reviews and identified additional stakeholders within EM and community organizations. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the conference format was modified. RESULTS: A total of 246 participants registered for the conference and participated in some capacity at three distinct online sessions. Research prioritization subgroups were as follows-group 1: ED screening and referral for social and access needs; group 2: structural competency; and group 3: race, racism, and antiracism. Thirty-two "projects in progress" were presented within five domains-identity and health: people and places; health care systems; training and education; material needs; and individual and structural violence. CONCLUSIONS: Despite ongoing challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the 2021 SAEM consensus conference brought together hundreds of stakeholders to define research priorities and create collaborations to push the field forward.

Association of Elementary School Reopening Status and County COVID-19 Incidence.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between elementary school opening status (ESOS) and changes in pediatric COVID-19 incidence. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of US counties with school districts with ≥500 elementary school students. The main exposure was ESOS in September, 2020. The outcome was county incidence of COVID-19. Age-stratified negative binomial regression models were constructed using county adult COVID-19 incidence. RESULTS: Among 3220 US counties, 618 (19.2%) were remote, 391 (12.1%) were hybrid, 2022 (62.8%) were in-person. In unadjusted models, COVID-19 incidence after school started was higher among children in hybrid or in-person counties compared with remote counties. After adjustment for local adult incidence, among children aged 0 to 9, the incidence rate ratio of COVID-19 (IRR) compared with remote counties was 1.01 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.08) in hybrid counties and 0.79 (95% CI 0.75-0.84) in in-person counties. CONCLUSIONS: Counties with in-person learning did not have higher rates of COVID-19 after adjustment for local adult rates.

Neighborhood Disadvantage Measures and COVID-19 Cases in Boston, 2020.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding the pattern of population risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is critically important for health systems and policy makers. The objective of this study was to describe the association between neighborhood factors and number of COVID-19 cases. We hypothesized an association between disadvantaged neighborhoods and clusters of COVID-19 cases. METHODS: We analyzed data on patients presenting to a large health care system in Boston during February 5-May 4, 2020. We used a bivariate local join-count procedure to determine colocation between census tracts with high rates of neighborhood demographic characteristics (eg, Hispanic race/ethnicity) and measures of disadvantage (eg, health insurance status) and COVID-19 cases. We used negative binomial models to assess independent associations between neighborhood factors and the incidence of COVID-19. RESULTS: A total of 9898 COVID-19 patients were in the cohort. The overall crude incidence in the study area was 32 cases per 10 000 population, and the adjusted incidence per census tract ranged from 2 to 405 per 10 000 population. We found significant colocation of several neighborhood factors and the top quintile of cases: percentage of population that was Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, without health insurance, receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, and living in poverty. Factors associated with increased incidence of COVID-19 included percentage of population that is Hispanic (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.28) and percentage of households living in poverty (IRR = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.19-1.32). CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant association between neighborhoods with high rates of disadvantage and COVID-19. Policy makers need to consider these health inequities when responding to the pandemic and planning for subsequent health needs.