Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
J Med Internet Res ; 24(8): e40288, 2022 08 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1974543

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of telemedicine and virtual consultations worldwide, complex factors that may affect the use of virtual clinics are still unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify factors associated with the utilization of virtual clinics in the experience of virtual clinic service implementation in Taiwan. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a total of 187,742 outpatient visits (176,815, 94.2%, in-person visits and 10,927, 5.8%, virtual visits) completed at a large general hospital in Taipei City from May 19 to July 31, 2021, after rapid implementation of virtual outpatient clinic visits due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data of patients' demographic characteristics, disease type, physicians' features, and specialties/departments were collected, and physicians' opinions regarding virtual clinics were surveyed and evaluated using a 5-point Likert scale. Multilevel analysis was conducted to determine the factors associated with the utilization of virtual clinics. RESULTS: Patient-/visit-, physician-, and department-level factors accounted for 67.5%, 11.1%, and 21.4% of the total variance in the utilization of virtual clinics, respectively. Female sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.27, 95% CI 1.22-1.33, P<.001); residing at a greater distance away from the hospital (OR 2.36, 95% CI 2.15-2.58 if distance>50 km, P<.001; OR 3.95, 95% CI 3.11-5.02 if extensive travel required, P<.001); reimbursement by the National Health Insurance (NHI; OR 7.29, 95% CI 5.71-9.30, P<.001); seeking care for a major chronic disease (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.24-1.42, P<.001); the physician's positive attitude toward virtual clinics (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.16-1.93, P=.002); and visits within certain departments, including the heart center, psychiatry, and internal medicine (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.46-4.46, P=.004), were positively associated with the utilization of virtual clinics. The patient's age, the physician's age, and the physician's sex were not associated with the utilization of virtual clinics in our study. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that in addition to previously demonstrated patient-level factors that may influence telemedicine use, including the patient's sex and distance from the hospital, factors at the visit level (insurance type, disease type), physician level (physician's attitude toward virtual clinics), and department level also contribute to the utilization of virtual clinics. Although there was a more than 300-fold increase in the number of virtual visits during the pandemic compared with the prepandemic period, the majority (176,815/187,742, 94.2%) of the outpatient visits were still in-person visits during the study period. Therefore, it is of great importance to understand the factors impacting the utilization of virtual clinics to accelerate the implementation of telemedicine. The findings of our study may help direct policymaking for expanding the use of virtual clinics, especially in countries struggling with the development and promotion of telemedicine virtual clinic services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Telemedicine , Ambulatory Care Facilities , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Multilevel Analysis , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , Taiwan , Telemedicine/methods , Telemedicine/trends
2.
Cureus ; 13(11): e19203, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1524558

ABSTRACT

Objective The need for clinicians to access Infectious Diseases (ID) consultants for clinical decision-making support increased during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Traditional ID consultations with face-to-face (FTF) patient assessments are not always possible or practical during a pandemic and involve added exposure risk and personal protective equipment (PPE) use. Electronic consultations (e-consults) may provide an alternative and improve access to ID specialists during the pandemic. Methods We implemented ID e-consult platforms designed to answer clinical questions related to COVID-19 at three academic clinical institutions in Dallas, Texas. We conducted a retrospective review of all COVID-19 ID e-consults between March 16, 2020 and May 15, 2020 evaluating characteristics and outcomes of e-consults among the clinical sites. Results We completed 198 COVID-19 ID e-consults at participating institutions. The most common e-consult indications were for 63 (32%) repeat testing, 61 (31%) initial testing, 65 (33%) treatment options, and 61 (31%) Infection Prevention (IP). Based on the e-consult recommendation, 53 (27%) of patients were initially tested for COVID-19, 45 (23%) were re-tested, 44 (22%) of patients had PPE precautions initiated, and 37 (19%) had PPE precautions removed. The median time to consult completion was four hours and 8 (4%) consults were converted to standard FTF consults. Conclusion E-consult services can provide safe and timely access to ID specialists during the COVID-19 pandemic, minimizing the risk of infection to the patient and health care workers, while preserving PPE and testing supplies.

3.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc ; 31: 100665, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-885292

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID pandemic has challenged the traditional methods used in care of patients with heart failure (HF). Remote management of HF patients has been recommended in order to maintain routine standards of care, but satisfaction with this platform of care is unknown. We set out to address the physician and patient opinion of remote management of HF during COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: An observational report of the use of a Structured Telephonic assessment (STA) in stable outpatient HF patients. Physician grading of the STA was complemented by 100 randomly chosen patients to ascertain patient satisfaction and comment. 278 patients underwent a STA. Patient preference for STA was noted in 66%. Convenience was the single most cited reason for this preference (83.3%). The STA was deemed satisfactory by clinicians in 67.6%. The two-leading reasons for clinician dissatisfaction were data gaps providing a barrier to titration (55.6%) and need for clinical exam (18.9%). The annual review appointment visit subtype possessed the highest levels of satisfaction congruence amongst both clinicians and patients. CONCLUSION: In summary, this report demonstrates reasonable patient / physician satisfaction with STA, and provides some direction on how this care platform might be sustained beyond the COVID crisis.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL