Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 84
Filter
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
1.
BMJ ; 375: e065834, 2021 12 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1599220

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe the rates for consulting a general practitioner (GP) for sequelae after acute covid-19 in patients admitted to hospital with covid-19 and those managed in the community, and to determine how the rates change over time for patients in the community and after vaccination for covid-19. DESIGN: Population based study. SETTING: 1392 general practices in England contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum database. PARTICIPANTS: 456 002 patients with a diagnosis of covid-19 between 1 August 2020 and 14 February 2021 (44.7% men; median age 61 years), admitted to hospital within two weeks of diagnosis or managed in the community, and followed-up for a maximum of 9.2 months. A negative control group included individuals without covid-19 (n=38 511) and patients with influenza before the pandemic (n=21 803). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of rates for consulting a GP for new symptoms, diseases, prescriptions, and healthcare use in individuals admitted to hospital and those managed in the community, separately, before and after covid-19 infection, using Cox regression and negative binomial regression for healthcare use. The analysis was repeated for the negative control and influenza cohorts. In individuals in the community, outcomes were also described over time after a diagnosis of covid-19, and compared before and after vaccination for individuals who were symptomatic after covid-19 infection, using negative binomial regression. RESULTS: Relative to the negative control and influenza cohorts, patients in the community (n=437 943) had significantly higher GP consultation rates for multiple sequelae, and the most common were loss of smell or taste, or both (adjusted hazard ratio 5.28, 95% confidence interval 3.89 to 7.17, P<0.001); venous thromboembolism (3.35, 2.87 to 3.91, P<0.001); lung fibrosis (2.41, 1.37 to 4.25, P=0.002), and muscle pain (1.89, 1.63 to 2.20, P<0.001); and also for healthcare use after a diagnosis of covid-19 compared with 12 months before infection. For absolute proportions, the most common outcomes ≥4 weeks after a covid-19 diagnosis in patients in the community were joint pain (2.5%), anxiety (1.2%), and prescriptions for non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (1.2%). Patients admitted to hospital (n=18 059) also had significantly higher GP consultation rates for multiple sequelae, most commonly for venous thromboembolism (16.21, 11.28 to 23.31, P<0.001), nausea (4.64, 2.24 to 9.21, P<0.001), prescriptions for paracetamol (3.68, 2.86 to 4.74, P<0.001), renal failure (3.42, 2.67 to 4.38, P<0.001), and healthcare use after a covid-19 diagnosis compared with 12 months before infection. For absolute proportions, the most common outcomes ≥4 weeks after a covid-19 diagnosis in patients admitted to hospital were venous thromboembolism (3.5%), joint pain (2.7%), and breathlessness (2.8%). In patients in the community, anxiety and depression, abdominal pain, diarrhoea, general pain, nausea, chest tightness, and tinnitus persisted throughout follow-up. GP consultation rates were reduced for all symptoms, prescriptions, and healthcare use, except for neuropathic pain, cognitive impairment, strong opiates, and paracetamol use in patients in the community after the first vaccination dose for covid-19 relative to before vaccination. GP consultation rates were also reduced for ischaemic heart disease, asthma, and gastro-oesophageal disease. CONCLUSIONS: GP consultation rates for sequelae after acute covid-19 infection differed between patients with covid-19 who were admitted to hospital and those managed in the community. For individuals in the community, rates of some sequelae decreased over time but those for others, such as anxiety and depression, persisted. Rates of some outcomes decreased after vaccination in this group.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Community Health Services , General Practitioners , Hospitalization , Office Visits/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , Venous Thromboembolism/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Proportional Hazards Models , State Medicine , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Venous Thromboembolism/etiology
2.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 100(41): e27399, 2021 Oct 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501200

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has intensified globally since its origin in Wuhan, China in December 2019. Many medical groups across the United States have experienced extraordinary clinical and financial pressures due to COVID-19 as a result of a decline in elective inpatient and outpatient surgical procedures and most nonurgent elective physician visits. The current study reports how our medical group in a metropolitan community in Kentucky rebooted our ambulatory and inpatient services following the guidance of our state's phased reopening. Particular attention focused on the transition between the initial COVID-19 surge and post-COVID-19 surge and how our medical group responded to meet community needs. Ten strategies were incorporated in our medical group, including heightened communication; ambulatory telehealth; safe and clean outpatient environment; marketing; physician, other medical provider, and staff compensation; high quality patient experience; schedule optimization; rescheduling tactics; data management; and primary care versus specialty approaches. These methods are applicable to both the current rebooting stage as well as to a potential resurgence of COVID-19 in the future.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/organization & administration , Office Visits/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/organization & administration , Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/organization & administration , Humans , Kentucky/epidemiology , Pandemics , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Quality Improvement , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Sci Prog ; 104(3): 368504211042980, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1430320

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the truthfulness of patients about their pre-appointment COVID-19 screening tests at a dental clinic. METHODS: A total of 613 patients were recruited for the study from the dental clinic at the Faculty of Dentistry, Najran University, Saudi Arabia. The data collection was done in three parts from the patients who visited the hospital to receive dental treatment. The first part included the socio-demographic characteristics of the patients and the COVID-19 swab tests performed within the past 14 days. The second part was the clinical examination, and the third part was a confirmation of the swab test taken by the patient by checking the Hesen website using the patient ID. After data collection, statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS 26.0. Descriptive analysis was done and expressed as mean, standard deviation, frequency, and percentage (%). A cross-tabulation, also described as a contingency table, was used to identify trends and patterns across data and explain the correlation between different variables. RESULTS: It was seen from the status of the swab test within 14 days of the patient's arrival at the hospital for the dental treatment that 18 (2.9%) patients lied about the pre-treatment swab test within 14 days, and 595 (97.1%) were truthful. The observed and expected counts showed across genders and diagnosis a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001), and there was no significant difference seen across different age groups (p = 0.064) of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dental healthcare workers are worried and assume a high risk of COVID-19 infection as the patients are not truthful about the pre-treatment COVID-19 swab test. Routine rapid tests on patients and the healthcare staff are a feasible option for lowering overall risks.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Truth Disclosure/ethics , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Testing , Dental Offices/ethics , Dental Offices/organization & administration , Female , Health Personnel/psychology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Office Visits/statistics & numerical data , Patient Compliance/psychology , Risk , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Saudi Arabia/epidemiology
6.
Rheumatol Int ; 41(10): 1755-1761, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1384393

ABSTRACT

The SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic resulted in major disruptions to medical care. We aimed to understand changes in outpatient care delivery and use of telemedicine in U.S. rheumatology practices during this period. Rheumatology Informatics System Effectiveness (RISE) is a national, EHR-enabled registry that passively collects data on all patients seen by participating practices. Included practices were required to have been participating in RISE from January 2019 through August 2020 (N = 213). We compared total visit counts and telemedicine visits during March-August 2020 to March-August 2019 and stratified by locations in states with shelter-in-place (SIP) orders. We assessed characteristics of patients within each practice, including primary rheumatic diagnosis and disease activity scores, where available. We included 213 practices with 945,160 patients. Overall, we found visit counts decreased by 10.9% (from 1,302,455 to 1,161,051) between March and August 2020 compared to 2019; this drop was most dramatic during the month of April (- 22.3%). Telemedicine visits increased from 0% to a mean of 12.1%. Practices in SIP states had more dramatic decreases in visits, (11.5% vs. 5.3%). We found no major differences in primary diagnoses or disease activity across the two periods. We detected a meaningful decrease in rheumatology visits in March-August 2020 during the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic compared to the year prior with a concomitant increase in the use of telemedicine. Future work should address possible adverse consequences to patient outcomes due to decreased contact with clinicians.


Subject(s)
Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Office Visits/statistics & numerical data , Rheumatology/organization & administration , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Registries , Rheumatology/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
8.
J Neuroophthalmol ; 41(3): 362-367, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1367100

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) has significantly changed medical practice in the United States, including an increase in the utilization of telemedicine. Here, we characterize change in neuro-ophthalmic care delivery during the early COVID-19 PHE, including a comparison of care delivered via telemedicine and in office. METHODS: Neuro-ophthalmology outpatient encounters from 3 practices in the United States (4 providers) were studied during the early COVID-19 PHE (March 15, 2020-June 15, 2020) and during the same dates 1 year prior. For unique patient visits, patient demographics, visit types, visit format, and diagnosis were compared between years and between synchronous telehealth and in-office formats for 2020. RESULTS: There were 1,276 encounters for 1,167 patients. There were 30% fewer unique patient visits in 2020 vs 2019 (477 vs 670) and 55% fewer in-office visits (299 vs 670). Compared with 2019, encounters in 2020 were more likely to be established, to occur via telemedicine and to relate to an efferent diagnosis. In 2020, synchronous telehealth visits were more likely to be established compared with in-office encounters. CONCLUSIONS: In the practices studied, a lower volume of neuro-ophthalmic care was delivered during the early COVID-19 public health emergency than in the same period in 2019. The type of care shifted toward established patients with efferent diagnoses and the modality of care shifted toward telemedicine.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Eye Diseases/epidemiology , Neurology/organization & administration , Office Visits/trends , Ophthalmology/organization & administration , Pandemics , Telemedicine/methods , Comorbidity , Female , Humans , Male , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
9.
PLoS One ; 16(8): e0255992, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1354764

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: We aimed to determine the degree to which reasons for primary care visits changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We used data from the University of Toronto Practice Based Research Network (UTOPIAN) to compare the most common reasons for primary care visits before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the number of visits and the number of patients seen for each of the 25 most common diagnostic codes. The proportion of visits involving virtual care was assessed as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: UTOPIAN family physicians (N = 379) conducted 702,093 visits, involving 264,942 patients between March 14 and December 31, 2019 (pre-pandemic period), and 667,612 visits, involving 218,335 patients between March 14 and December 31, 2020 (pandemic period). Anxiety was the most common reason for visit, accounting for 9.2% of the total visit volume during the pandemic compared to 6.5% the year before. Diabetes and hypertension remained among the top 5 reasons for visit during the pandemic, but there were 23.7% and 26.2% fewer visits and 19.5% and 28.8% fewer individual patients accessing care for diabetes and hypertension, respectively. Preventive care visits were substantially reduced, with 89.0% fewer periodic health exams and 16.2% fewer well-baby visits. During the pandemic, virtual care became the dominant care format (77.5% virtual visits). Visits for anxiety and depression were the most common reasons for a virtual visit (90.6% virtual visits). CONCLUSION: The decrease in primary care visit volumes during the COVID-19 pandemic varied based on the reason for the visit, with increases in visits for anxiety and decreases for preventive care and visits for chronic diseases. Implications of increased demands for mental health services and gaps in preventive care and chronic disease management may require focused efforts in primary care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Office Visits , Primary Health Care , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Canada , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics
10.
Dermatol Clin ; 39(4): 587-597, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1343177

ABSTRACT

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on dermatology practice cannot be overstated. At its peak, the pandemic resulted in the temporary closure of ambulatory sites as resources were reallocated towards pandemic response efforts. Many outpatient clinics have since reopened and are beginning to experience a semblance of pre-pandemic routine, albeit with restrictions in place. We provide an overview of how COVID-19 has affected dermatology practice globally beginning with the rise of teledermatology. A summary of expert recommendations that shape the "new normal" in various domains of dermatology practice, namely, dermatology consultation, procedural dermatology, and phototherapy, is also provided.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care Facilities/trends , Dermatology/standards , Primary Health Care/trends , Skin Diseases/therapy , Telemedicine/trends , COVID-19/epidemiology , Dermatology/trends , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Humans , Office Visits/trends , Skin Diseases/epidemiology
13.
Healthc Q ; 24(2): 12-14, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1323458

ABSTRACT

The Canadian Institute for Health Information has compiled health system data to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Canada's healthcare system. Information was aggregated from four distinct sectors of care: emergency department visits, in-patient hospital stays, physician care and home care. Across the sectors, there were two compelling themes: rapid transformation and change in human behaviour.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Canada/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Home Care Services/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Office Visits/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data
14.
Ann Fam Med ; 19(4): 365-367, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1311276

ABSTRACT

When the immediate threat of COVID-19 subsides, the future of health care will involve more virtual care. Before the pandemic, patient choice rather than clinician guidance determined which medium (telephone visits, video visits, electronic messaging) was used to receive care. Two media synchronicity theory principles-conveyance and convergence-can create a framework for determining how to choose the right medium of care for the patient. The author describes how it changed their practice and decision making with a patient story that required the use of multiple virtual care options.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communication , Telemedicine/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Child, Preschool , Cough/etiology , Dyspnea/etiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Office Visits , Patient Care Planning , Patient Preference , SARS-CoV-2 , Syphilis/diagnosis , Telephone , Text Messaging , Videoconferencing
15.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 73(8): 1153-1161, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1298444

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on community-based rheumatology care and the use of telehealth is unclear. We undertook this study to investigate the impact of the pandemic on rheumatology care delivery in a large community practice-based network. METHODS: Using a community practice-based rheumatologist network, we examined trends in in-person versus telehealth visits versus canceled visits in 3 time periods: pre-COVID-19, COVID-19 transition (6 weeks beginning March 23, 2020), and post-COVID-19 transition (May-August). In the transition period, we compared patients who received in-person care versus telehealth visits versus those who cancelled all visits. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with canceled or telehealth visits. RESULTS: Pre-COVID-19, there were 7,075 visits/week among 60,002 unique rheumatology patients cared for by ~300 providers practicing in 92 offices. This number decreased substantially (24.6% reduction) during the COVID-19 transition period for in-person visits but rebounded to pre-COVID-19 levels during the post-COVID-19 transition. There were almost no telehealth visits pre-COVID-19, but telehealth increased substantially during the COVID-19 transition (41.4% of all follow-up visits) and slightly decreased during the post-COVID-19 transition (27.7% of visits). Older age, female sex, Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity, lower socioeconomic status, and rural residence were associated with a greater likelihood of canceling visits. Most factors were also associated with a lower likelihood of having telehealth versus in-office visits. Patients living further from the rheumatologists' office were more likely to use telehealth. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 led to large disruptions in rheumatology care; these disruptions were only partially offset by increases in telehealth use and disproportionately affected racial/ethnic minorities and patients with lower socioeconomic status. During the COVID-19 era, telehealth continues to be an important part of rheumatology practice, but disparities in access to care exist for some vulnerable groups.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Community Health Services/trends , Office Visits/trends , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Rheumatology/trends , Telemedicine/trends , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/prevention & control , Delivery of Health Care/trends , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged
17.
J Prim Care Community Health ; 12: 21501327211023871, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1264113

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess primary care contributions to behavioral health in addressing unmet mental healthcare needs due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Secondary data analysis of 2016 to 2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey of non-institutionalized US adults. We performed bivariate analysis to estimate the number and percentage of office-based visits and prescription medications for depression and anxiety disorders, any mental illness (AMI), and severe mental illness (AMI) by physician specialty (primary care, psychiatry, and subspecialty) and medical complexity. We ran summary statistics to compare the differences in sociodemographic factors between patients with AMI by seeing a primary care physician versus those seeing a psychiatrist. Binary logistic regression models were estimated to examine the likelihood of having a primary care visit versus psychiatrist visit for a given mental illness. RESULTS: There were 394 023 office-based visits in the analysis sample. AMI patients seeing primary care physician were thrice as likely to report 1 or more chronic conditions compared to those seeing psychiatrist. Among patients with a diagnosis of depression or anxiety and AMI the proportion of primary care visits ([38% vs 32%, P < .001], [39% vs 34%, P < .001] respectively), and prescriptions ([50% vs 40%, P < .001], [47% vs 44%, P < .05] respectively) were higher compared to those for psychiatric care. Patients diagnosed with SMI had a more significant percentage of prescriptions and visits to a psychiatrist than primary care physicians. CONCLUSION: Primary care physicians provided most of the care for depression, anxiety, and AMI. Almost a third of the care for SMI and a quarter of the SMI prescriptions occurred in primary care settings. Our study underscores the importance of supporting access to primary care given primary care physicians' critical role in combating the COVID-19 related rise in mental health burden.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychiatry , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Health Care Surveys , Health Expenditures , Humans , Office Visits , Pandemics , Primary Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
18.
J Am Dent Assoc ; 152(7): 535-541.e1, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1237579

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has created barriers to the delivery of health care services, including dental care. This study sought to quantify the change in dental visits in 2020 compared with 2019. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study examined the percentage change in weekly visits to dental offices by state (inclusive of the District of Columbia), nationally, and by county-level COVID-19 incidence using geographic information from the mobile applications of 45 million smartphones during 2019 and 2020. RESULTS: From March through August 2020, weekly visits to dental offices were 33% lower, on average, than in 2019. Weekly visits were 34% lower, on average, in counties with the highest COVID-19 rates. The greatest decline was observed during the week of April 12, 2020, when there were 66% fewer weekly visits to dental offices. The 5 states (inclusive of the District of Columbia) with the greatest declines in weekly visits from 2019 through 2020, ranging from declines of 38% through 53%, were California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. CONCLUSIONS: Weekly visits to US dental offices declined drastically during the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although rates of weekly visits rebounded substantially by June 2020, rates remain about 20% lower than the prior year as of August 2020. These findings highlight the economic challenges faced by dentists owing to the pandemic. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: States exhibited widespread variation in rates of declining visits during the pandemic, suggesting that dental practices may need to consider different approaches to reopening and encouraging patients to return depending on location.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Connecticut , Dental Offices , Humans , Office Visits , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
19.
Scand J Urol ; 55(3): 177-183, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1223275

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: In March-April 2020, during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic lockdown in Denmark, the Danish Health Authorities recommended that, where possible, face-to-face patient-physician consultations be replaced by telephone consultations. The aim of this study was to obtain patients' evaluation of their telemedicine experience. METHODS: Patients who were candidates for telemedicine consultations were recruited based on their urological ailment, necessity for follow-up and comorbidity. New referrals including patients with suspicion of cancer were not candidates for telemedicine. In total, 548 patients had their appointment altered during the period from 13 March to 30 April 2020. Postal questionnaires were sent to 548 patients and 300 (54.7%) replied. RESULTS: In total, 280 patient answered, 224 (80%) men and 56 (20%) women, mean age 69 years (range 18-91) of whom 180 (64.3%) had a benign and 100 (35.7%) a malignant diagnosis. Twenty (6.7%) respondents did not remember their telephone consultation and were therefore excluded. Telephone consultation satisfaction was reported by 230 (85.0%) patients, but they would not prefer video consultations over telephone consultations, and only 102 (36.4%) would prefer telephone consultations in the future. Patients' age, sex and distance to the hospital did not seem to be associated with telephone consultation satisfaction (age p = 0.17; sex p = 0.99; distance p = 0.27, respectively). In total, 226 (80.7%) were medically assessed as being at risk for COVID, but 74 (26.4%) subjectively evaluated themselves as being at risk. CONCLUSIONS: In general (85.0%), urological patients were satisfied with telephone consultations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Patient Preference/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/statistics & numerical data , Urology/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Denmark , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Office Visits , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , Telephone , Urologic Diseases/therapy , Urology/methods , Videoconferencing , Young Adult
20.
Psychiatry Res ; 301: 113966, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1201985

ABSTRACT

Most research evaluating telehealth psychiatric treatment has been conducted in outpatient settings. There is a lack of research assessing the efficacy of telehealth treatment in more acute, intensive treatment settings such as a partial hospital. In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, much of ambulatory behavioral health treatment has transitioned to a telehealth, or virtual, format. In the present report from the Rhode Island Methods to Improve Diagnostic Assessment and Services (MIDAS) project, we compared patient satisfaction of partial hospital services delivered via telehealth to in-person treatment provided to patients treated prior to the COVID-19 outbreak. The sample included 240 patients who were treated virtually from May, 2020 to October, 2020, and a comparison group of 240 patients who were treated in the in-person partial program a year earlier. Patients completed self-administered measures of patient satisfaction after the initial evaluation and at the end of treatment. For both the in-person and telehealth methods of delivering partial hospital level of care, patients were highly satisfied with the initial diagnostic evaluation and were optimistic at admission that treatment would be helpful. At the completion of treatment, both groups were highly satisfied with all components of the treatment program and almost all would recommend treatment to a friend or family member. Thus, patient satisfaction was as high with telehealth partial hospital treatment as with in-person treatment.


Subject(s)
Behavior Therapy/methods , COVID-19 , Mental Disorders/therapy , Office Visits/statistics & numerical data , Patient Satisfaction , Personal Satisfaction , Telemedicine/methods , Ambulatory Care , Ambulatory Care Facilities , COVID-19/epidemiology , Delivery of Health Care , Health Services Accessibility , Hospitalization , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/psychology , Outpatients , Pandemics , Rhode Island , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...