Visit and Between-Visit Interaction Frequency Before and After COVID-19 Telehealth Implementation.

Importance: Telehealth implementation associated with the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) affected patient-clinical team interactions in numerous ways. Yet, studies have narrowly examined billed patient-clinician visits rather than including visits with other team members (eg, pharmacists) or between-visit interactions. Objective: To evaluate rates of change over time in visits (in-person, telehealth) and between-visit interactions (telephone calls, patient portal messages) overall and by key patient characteristics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included adults with diabetes receiving primary care at urban academic (University of California San Francisco [UCSF]) and safety-net (San Francisco Health Network [SFHN]) health care systems. Encounters from April 2019 to March 2021 were analyzed. Exposure: Telehealth implementation over 3 periods: pre-PHE (April 2019 to March 2020), strict shelter-in-place (April to June 2020), and hybrid-PHE (July 2020 to March 2021). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were rates of change in monthly mean number of total encounters, visits with any health care team member, visits with billing clinicians, and between-visit interactions. Key patient-level characteristics were age, race and ethnicity, language, and neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES). Results: Of 15 148 patients (4976 UCSF; 8975 SFHN) included, 2464 (16%) were 75 years or older, 7734 (51%) were female patients, 9823 (65%) self-identified as racially or ethnically minoritized, 6223 (41%) had a non-English language preference, and 4618 (31%) lived in the lowest nSES quintile. After accounting for changes to care delivery through an interrupted time-series analysis, total encounters increased in the hybrid-PHE period (UCSF: 2.3% per patient/mo; 95% CI, 1.6%-2.9% per patient/mo; SFHN: 1.8% per patient/mo, 95% CI, 1.3%-2.2% per patient/mo), associated primarily with growth in between-visit interactions (UCSF: 3.1% per patient/mo, 95% CI, 2.3%-3.8% per patient/mo; SFHN: 2.9% per patient/mo, 95% CI, 2.3%-3.4% per patient/mo). In contrast, rates of visits were stable during the hybrid-PHE period. Although there were fewer differences in visit use by key patient-level characteristics during the hybrid-PHE period, pre-PHE differences in between-visit interactions persisted during the hybrid-PHE period at SFHN. Asian and Chinese-speaking patients at SFHN had fewer monthly mean between-visit interactions compared with White patients (0.46 [95% CI, 0.42-0.50] vs 0.59 [95% CI, 0.53-0.66] between-visit interactions/patient/mo; P < .001) and English-speaking patients (0.52 [95% CI, 0.47-0.58] vs 0.61 [95% CI, 0.56-0.66] between-visit interactions/patient/mo; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, pre-PHE growth in overall patient-clinician encounters persisted after PHE-related telehealth implementation, driven in both periods by between-visit interactions. Differential utilization based on patient characteristics was observed, which may indicate disparities. The implications for health care team workload and patient outcomes are unknown, particularly regarding between-visit interactions. Therefore, to comprehensively understand care utilization for patients with chronic diseases, research should expand beyond billed visits.