RESUMO
Introduction Telehealth visits (TH) have become an important pillar of healthcare delivery during the COVID pandemic. No-shows (NS) may result in delays in clinical care and in lost revenue. Understanding the factors associated with NS may help providers take measures to decrease the frequency and impact of NS in their clinics. We aim to study the demographic and clinical diagnoses associated with NS to ambulatory telehealth neurology visits. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of all telehealth video visits (THV) in our healthcare system from 1/1/2021 to 5/1/2021 (cross-sectional study). All patients at or above 18 years of age who either had a completed visit (CV) or had an NS for their neurology ambulatory THV were included. Patients having missing demographic variables and not meeting the ICD-10 primary diagnosis codes were excluded. Demographic factors and ICD-10 primary diagnosis codes were retrieved. NS and CV groups were compared using independent samples t-tests and chi-square tests as appropriate. Multivariate regression, with backward elimination, was conducted to identify pertinent variables. Results Our search resulted in 4,670 unique THV encounters out of which 428 (9.2%) were NS and 4,242 (90.8%) were CV. Multivariate regression with backward elimination showed that the odds of NS were higher with a self-identified non-Caucasian race OR = 1.65 (95%, CI: 1.28-2.14), possessing Medicaid insurance OR = 1.81 (95%, CI: 1.54-2.12) and with primary diagnoses of sleep disorders OR = 10.87 (95%, CI: 5.55-39.84), gait abnormalities (OR = 3.63 (95%, CI: 1.81-7.27), and back/radicular pain OR = 5.62 (95%, CI: 2.84-11.10). Being married was associated with CVs OR = 0.74 (95%, CI: 0.59-0.91) as well as primary diagnoses of multiple sclerosis OR = 0.24 (95%, CI: 0.13-0.44) and movement disorders OR = 0.41 (95%, CI: 0.25-0.68). Conclusion Demographic factors, such as self-identified race, insurance status, and primary neurological diagnosis codes, can be helpful to predict an NS to neurology THs. This data can be used to warn providers regarding the risk of NS.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of information on the practice patterns and available human resources and services for screening for eye complications among persons with diabetes in India. OBJECTIVES: The study was undertaken to document existing health care infrastructure and practice patterns for managing diabetes and screening for eye complications. METHODS: This cross-sectional, hospital-based survey was conducted in 11 cities where public and private diabetic care providers were identified. Both multispecialty and standalone diabetic care facilities were included. A semi-structured questionnaire was administered to senior representative(s) of each institution to evaluate parameters using the World Health Organization health systems framework. RESULTS: We interviewed physicians in 73 hospitals (61.6% multispecialty hospitals; 38.4% standalone clinics). Less than a third reported having skilled personnel for direct ophthalmoscopy. About 74% had provision for glycated hemoglobin testing. Only a third had adequate vision charts. Printed protocols on management of diabetes were available only in 31.5% of the facilities. Only one in four facilities had a system for tracking diabetics. Half the facilities reported having access to records from the treating ophthalmologists. Direct observation of the services provided showed that reported figures in relation to availability of patient support services were overestimated by around 10%. Three fourths of the information sheets and half the glycemia monitoring cards contained information on the eye complications and the need for a regular eye examination. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted existing gaps in service provision at diabetic care centers in India.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: India has the second largest population of persons with diabetes and a significant proportion has poor glycemic control and inadequate awareness of management of diabetes. OBJECTIVES: Determine the level of awareness regarding management of diabetes and its complications and diabetic care practices in India. METHODS: The cross-sectional, hospital-based survey was conducted in 11 cities where public and private providers of diabetic care were identified. At each diabetic care facility, 4-6 persons with diabetes were administered a structured questionnaire in the local language. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighty-five persons with diabetes were interviewed. The mean duration since diagnosis of diabetes was 8.1 years (standard deviation ± 7.3). Half of the participants reported a family history of diabetes and 41.7% were hypertensive. Almost 62.1% stated that they received information on diabetes and its management through interpersonal channels. Family history (36.1%), increasing age (25.3%), and stress (22.8%) were the commonest causes of diabetes reported. Only 29.1% stated that they monitored their blood sugar levels at home using a glucometer. The commonest challenges reported in managing diabetes were dietary modifications (67.4%), compliance with medicines (20.5%), and cost of medicines (17.9%). Around 76.5% were aware of complications of diabetes. Kidney failure (79.8%), blindness/vision loss (79.3%), and heart attack (56.4%) were the commonest complications mentioned. Almost 67.7% of the respondents stated that they had had an eye examination earlier. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have significant implications for the organization of diabetes services in India for early detection and management of complications, including eye complications.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of information on the availability of services for diagnosis and management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in India. OBJECTIVES: The study was undertaken to document existing healthcare infrastructure and practice patterns for managing DR. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 11 cities and included public and private eye care providers. Both multispecialty and stand-alone eye care facilities were included. Information was collected on the processes used in all steps of the program, from how diabetics were identified for screening through to policies about follow-up after treatment by administering a semistructured questionnaire and by using observational checklists. RESULTS: A total of 86 eye units were included (31.4% multispecialty hospitals; 68.6% stand-alone clinics). The availability of a dedicated retina unit was reported by 68.6% (59) facilities. The mean number of outpatient consultations per year was 45,909 per responding facility, with nearly half being new registrations. A mean of 631 persons with sight-threatening-DR (ST-DR) were registered per year per facility. The commonest treatment for ST-DR was laser photocoagulation. Only 58% of the facilities reported having a full-time retina specialist on their rolls. More than half the eye care facilities (47; 54.6%) reported that their ophthalmologists would like further training in retina. Half (51.6%) of the facilities stated that they needed laser or surgical equipment. About 46.5% of the hospitals had a system to track patients needing treatment or for follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlighted existing gaps in service provision at eye care facilities in India.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of visual impairment. Low awareness about the disease and inequitable distribution of care are major challenges in India. OBJECTIVES: Assess perception of care and challenges faced in availing care among diabetics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cross-sectional, hospital based survey was conducted in eleven cities. In each city, public and private providers of eye-care were identified. Both multispecialty and standalone facilities were included. Specially designed semi-open ended questionnaires were administered to the clients. RESULTS: 376 diabetics were interviewed in the eye clinics, of whom 62.8% (236) were selected from facilities in cities with a population of 7 million or more. The mean duration of known diabetes was 11.1 (±7.7) years. Half the respondents understood the meaning of adequate glycemic control and 45% reported that they had visual loss when they first presented to an eye facility. Facilities in smaller cities and those with higher educational status were found to be statistically significant predictors of self-reported good/adequate control of diabetes. The correct awareness of glycemic control was significantly high among attending privately-funded facilities and higher educational status. Self-monitoring of glycemic status at home was significantly associated with respondents from larger cities, privately-funded facilities, those who were better educated and reported longer duration of diabetes. Duration of diabetes (41%), poor glycemic control (39.4%) and age (20.7%) were identified as the leading causes of DR. The commonest challenges faced were lifestyle/behavior related. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have significant implications for the organization of diabetes services in India.
