Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
PLoS One ; 17(3): e0265073, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1742018


BACKGROUND: Telenephrology has become an important health care delivery modality during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, little is known about patient perspectives on the quality of care provided via telenephrology compared to face-to-face visits. We aimed to use objective data to study patients' perspectives on outpatient nephrology care received via telenephrology (phone and video) versus face-to-face visits. METHODS: We retrospectively studied adults who received care in the outpatient Nephrology & Hypertension division at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, from March to July 2020. We used a standardized survey methodology to evaluate patient satisfaction. The primary outcome was the percent of patients who responded with a score of good (4) or very good (5) on a 5-point Likert scale on survey questions that asked their perspectives on access to their nephrologist, relationship with care provider, their opinions on the telenephrology technology, and their overall assessment of the care received. Wilcoxon rank sum tests and chi-square tests were used as appropriate to compare telenephrology versus face-to-face visits. RESULTS: 3,486 of the patient encounters were face-to-face, 808 phone and 317 video visits. 443 patients responded to satisfaction surveys, and 21% of these had telenephrology encounters. Established patients made up 79.6% of telenephrology visits and 60.9% of face-to-face visits. There was no significant difference in patient perceived access to health care, satisfaction with their care provider, or overall quality of care between patients cared for via telenephrology versus face-to-face. Patient satisfaction was also equally high. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction was equally high amongst those patients seen face-to-face or via telenephrology.

Ambulatory Care , COVID-19 , Kidney Diseases/therapy , Outpatients , Patient Satisfaction , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies
Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes ; 6(3): 186-192, 2022 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1729992


Objective: To determine whether the length of a telehealth visit predicted the risk of hospital readmission at 30 days in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) in southeastern Minnesota during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in SNFs located in southeastern Minnesota from March 1, 2020 through July 15, 2020. The primary outcomes included hospitalization within 30 days of a video visit, and the secondary outcome was the number of provider video visits during the stay at an SNF. The primary predictor was the duration of video visits, and we collected the data regarding other known predictors of hospitalization. We used the χ2 test for categorical variables and multivariate conditional logistic regression. Results: We included 722 patients (mean age, 82.8 years [SD, 10.8 years]). Of those, 76 SNF residents (10.5%) were rehospitalized within 30 days. The average length of a video visit was 34.0 minutes (SD, 22.7 minutes) in admitted residents compared with 30.0 minutes (SD, 15.9 minutes) in nonadmitted residents. After full adjustment, there was no difference in the video visit duration between admitted and nonadmitted residents (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.99-1.03). The number of subsequent provider video visits was 2.26 (SD, 1.9) in admitted residents vs 1.58 (SD, 1.6), which was significant after adjustment (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.02-1.34). Conclusion: There was no difference in the length of video visits for hospitalized SNF residents vs those who were not hospitalized within 30 days of a video visit. There were more visits in residents with hospital readmission. This may reflect the acuity of care for patients requiring a hospital stay. More research is needed to determine the ideal use of telehealth during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in the postacute and long-term care environment.