Telehealth Trends and Hypertension Management Among Rural and Medicaid Patients After COVID-19.

Objective: Examine the associations between rurality and low income with primary care telehealth utilization and hypertension outcomes across multiple years pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic onset. Methods: We compiled electronic health record data from the mixed rural/urban Dartmouth Health system in New Hampshire, United States, on patients with pre-existing hypertension or diabetes receiving primary care in the period before (January 2018-February 2020) and after the transition period to telehealth during the COVID-19 Pandemic (October 2020-December 2022). Stratifying by rurality and Medicaid enrollment, we examined changes in synchronous (office and telehealth visits, including audio/video use) and asynchronous (patient portal or telephone message) utilization, and control of mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) <140. Results: Analysis included 46,520 patients, of whom 8.2% were Medicaid enrollees, 42.7% urban residents. Telehealth use rates were 12% for rural versus 6.4% for urban, and 15% for Medicaid versus 8.4% non-Medicaid. The overall postpandemic telehealth visit rate was 0.29 per patient per year. Rural patients had a larger increase in telehealth use (additional 0.21 per year, 95% CI, 0.19-0.23) compared with urban, as did Medicaid (0.32, 95% CI 0.29-0.36) compared with non-Medicaid. Among the 38,437 patients with hypertension, SBP control worsened from 83% to 79% of patients across periods. In multivariable analysis, rurality corresponded to worsened control rates compared with urban (additional 2.4% decrease, 95% CI 2.1-2.8%); Medicaid and telehealth use were not associated with worsened control. Conclusions: Telehealth expansion enabled a higher shift to telehealth for rural and low-income patients without impairing hypertension management.

Pandemic Use of Telehealth by Oncology at a Rural Academic Medical Center.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an exponential increase in telehealth. In response to the pandemic, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Health (D-HH) and its Norris Cotton Cancer Center (NCCC) closed non-essential in-person services on March 17, 2020 and began reopening on April 27, 2020. We examined outpatient telehealth utilization at D-HH and NCCC in the peri-pandemic period and compared utilization to the Academic Medical Center (AMC) overall and to other service lines. Methods: Weekly outpatient volumes, percentage telehealth, percentage video versus audio-only, and percentage of new patients were examined for D-HH, for the AMC, and for selected AMC-based service lines from January 1 to October 31, 2020. Results: Compared with the AMC overall and with five other primarily non-surgical specialties, oncology was lower in the (1) proportion of outpatient visits performed via telehealth (example week 7/12/20: oncology = 11%; AMC = 21%; mean of 5 other specialties = 38%) and (2) percentage of telehealth involving video versus audio-only (7/12/20: oncology = 19%; AMC = 58%; mean of 5 others = 60%). Oncology more closely resembled the surgical specialty of orthopedics (7/12/20: 2% telehealth; 10% of telehealth involved video). Oncology also demonstrated (1) a high proportion of outpatient visits involving procedures (oncology = 22%; orthopedics = 12%) and (2) no difference between telehealth and in-person visits in terms of the percentage involving new patients. Conclusions: During the peri-pandemic period, our oncology service demonstrated a lower than average incorporation of telehealth overall into their outpatient practice and a lower proportion of telehealth performed by video. Further understanding these results and the drivers behind them will be integral for redesigning outpatient oncology care with optimal integration of telehealth.

The role of comorbidities, medications, and social determinants of health in understanding urban-rural outcome differences among patients with heart failure.

PURPOSE: There is now a 20% disparity in all-cause, excess deaths between urban and rural areas, much of which is driven by disparities in cardiovascular death. We sought to explain the sources of these disparities for Medicare beneficiaries with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: Using a sample of Medicare Parts A, B, and D, we created a cohort of 389,528 fee-for-service beneficiaries with at least 1 heart failure hospitalization from 2008 to 2017. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality after discharge; 1-year mortality, readmissions, and return emergency room (ER) admissions were secondary outcomes. We used hierarchical, logistic regression modeling to determine the contribution of comorbidities, guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), and social determinants of health (SDOH) to outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality rates after hospital discharge were 6.3% in rural areas compared to 5.7% in urban regions (P < .001); after adjusting for patient health and GDMT receipt, the 30-day mortality odds ratio for rural residence was 1.201 (95% CI 1.164-1.239). Adding the SDOH measure reduced the odds ratio somewhat (1.140, 95% CI 1.103-1.178) but a gap remained. Readmission rates in rural areas were consistently lower for all model specifications, while ER admissions were consistently higher. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with HFrEF, living in a rural area is associated with an increased risk of death and return ER visits within 30 days of discharge from HF hospitalization. Differences in SDOH appear to partially explain mortality differences but the remaining gap may be the consequence of rural-urban differences in HF treatment.

How to integrate shared decision-making into your practice.

Despite the many benefits of shared decision-making, uptake of its practices is low. These tools and frameworks can help you to engage patients in their care decisions.

Racial differences in low value care among older adult Medicare patients in US health systems: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize racial differences in receipt of low value care (services that provide little to no benefit yet have potential for harm) among older Medicare beneficiaries overall and within health systems in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study SETTING: 100% Medicare fee-for-service administrative data (2016-18). PARTICIPANTS: Black and White Medicare patients aged 65 or older as of 2016 and attributed to 595 health systems in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Receipt of 40 low value services among Black and White patients, with and without adjustment for patient age, sex, and previous healthcare use. Additional models included health system fixed effects to assess racial differences within health systems and separately, racial composition of the health system's population to assess the relative contributions of individual patient race and health system racial composition to low value care receipt. RESULTS: The cohort included 9 833 304 patients (6.8% Black; 57.9% female). Of 40 low value services examined, Black patients had higher adjusted receipt of nine services and lower receipt of 20 services than White patients. Specifically, Black patients were more likely to receive low value acute diagnostic tests, including imaging for uncomplicated headache (6.9% v 3.2%) and head computed tomography scans for dizziness (3.1% v 1.9%). White patients had higher rates of low value screening tests and treatments, including preoperative laboratory tests (10.3% v 6.5%), prostate specific antigen tests (31.0% v 25.7%), and antibiotics for upper respiratory infections (36.6% v 32.7%; all P<0.001). Secondary analyses showed that these differences persisted within given health systems and were not explained by Black and White patients receiving care from different systems. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients were more likely to receive low value acute diagnostic tests and White patients were more likely to receive low value screening tests and treatments. Differences were generally small and were largely due to differential care within health systems. These patterns suggest potential individual, interpersonal, and structural factors that researchers, policy makers, and health system leaders might investigate and address to improve care quality and equity.

Virtual Access to Subspecialty Care.

Telehealth programs existed in many subspecialities before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the public health event motivated many subspecialties to reflect on how current technologies could be leveraged to benefit patient outcomes and increase health-care access. This article reviews the history and current state of telehealth access in many areas of subspecialty care. Primary care physicians (PCPs) may be unaware of the telehealth services and options local subspecialists offer. To best serve patients, PCPs could partner with subspecialists to develop processes to link patients to the right subspecialist at the right time and in the right visit type.

Factors Influencing Telemedicine Use at a Northern New England Cancer Center During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

PURPOSE: To characterize the use of telemedicine for oncology care over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic in Northern New England with a focus on factors affecting trends. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study using patient visit data from electronic health records from hematology-oncology and radiation-oncology service lines spanning the local onset of the pandemic from March 18, 2020, through March 31, 2021. This period was subdivided into four phases designated as lockdown, transition, stabilization, and second wave. Generalized linear mixed regression models were used to estimate the effects of patient characteristics on trends for rates of telemedicine use across phases and the effects of visit type on patient satisfaction and postvisit ER or hospital admissions within 2 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 19,280 patients with 102,349 visits (13.1% audio-only and 1.4% video) were studied. Patient age (increased use in age < 45 and 85 years and older) and urban residence were associated with higher use of telemedicine, especially after initial lockdown. Recent cancer therapy, ER use, and hospital admissions in the past year were all associated with lower telemedicine utilization across pandemic phases. Provider clinical department corresponded to the largest differences in telemedicine use across all phases. ER and hospital admission rates in the 2 weeks after a telehealth visit were lower than those in in-person visits (0.7% v 1.3% and 1.2% v 2.7% for ER and hospital use, respectively; P < .001). Patient satisfaction did not vary across visit types. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine use in oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic varied according to the phase and patient, medical, and health system factors, suggesting opportunities for standardization of care and need for attention to equitable telemedicine access.

Adoption of Telemedicine in a Rural US Cancer Center Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid shift to telemedicine to minimize patient and provider exposure risks. While telemedicine has been used in a variety of primary and specialty care settings for many years, it has been slow to be adopted in oncology care. Health care provider and administrator perspectives on factors affecting telemedicine use in oncology settings are not well understood, and the conditions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic offered the opportunity to study the adoption of telemedicine and the resulting provider and staff perspectives on its use. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to study the factors that influenced telemedicine uptake and sustained use in outpatient oncology clinics at a US cancer center to inform future telemedicine practices. METHODS: We used purposive sampling to recruit a mix of oncology specialty providers, practice managers, as well as nursing and administrative staff representing 5 outpatient oncology clinics affiliated with the Dartmouth Cancer Center, a large regional cancer center in the northeast of United States, to participate in semistructured interviews conducted over 6 weeks in spring 2021. The interview guide was informed by the 5 domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, which include inner and outer setting factors, characteristics of the intervention (ie, telemedicine modality), individual-level factors (eg, provider and patient characteristics), and implementation processes. In total, 11 providers, 3 leaders, and 6 staff participated following verbal consent, and thematic saturation was reached across the full sample. We used a mixed deductive and inductive qualitative analysis approach to study the main influences on telemedicine uptake, implementation, and sustainability during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic across the 5 settings. RESULTS: The predominant influencers of telemedicine adoption in this study were individual provider experiences and assumptions about patient preference and accessibility. Providers' early telemedicine experiences, especially if negative, influenced preferences for telephone over video and affected sustained use. Telemedicine was most favorably viewed for lower-acuity cancer care, visits less dependent on physical exam, and for patient and caregiver education. A lack of clinical champions, leadership guidance, and vision hindered the implementation of standardized practices and were cited as essential for telemedicine sustainability. Respondents expressed anxiety about sustaining telemedicine use if reimbursements for telephonic visits diminished or ceased. Opportunities to enhance future efforts include a need to provide additional guidance supporting telemedicine use cases and evidence of effectiveness in oncology care and to address provider concerns with communication quality. CONCLUSIONS: In a setting of decentralized care processes, early challenges in telemedicine implementation had an outsized impact on the nature and amount of sustained use. Proactively designed telemedicine care processes with attention to patient needs will be essential to support a sustained role for telemedicine in cancer care.