A Multisite Electronic Health Record Integrated Remote Monitoring Intervention for Hypertension Improvement: Protocol for a Randomized Pragmatic Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a major contributor to various adverse health outcomes. Although previous studies have shown the benefits of home blood pressure (BP) monitoring over office-based measurements, there is limited evidence comparing the effectiveness of whether a BP monitor integrated into the electronic health record is superior to a nonintegrated BP monitor. OBJECTIVE: In this paper, we describe the protocol for a pragmatic multisite implementation of a quality improvement initiative directly comparing integrated to nonintegrated BP monitors for hypertension improvement. METHODS: We will conduct a randomized, comparative effectiveness trial at 3 large academic health centers across California. The 3 sites will enroll a total of 660 participants (approximately n=220 per site), with 330 in the integrated BP monitor arm and 330 in the nonintegrated BP control arm. The primary outcome of this study will be the absolute difference in systolic BP in mm Hg from enrollment to 6 months. Secondary outcome measures include binary measures of hypertension (controlled vs uncontrolled), hypertension-related health complications, hospitalizations, and death. The list of possible participants will be generated from a central data warehouse. Randomization will occur after enrollment in the study. Participants will use their assigned BP monitor and join site-specific hypertension interventions. Cross-site learning will occur at regular all-site meetings facilitated by the University of California, Los Angeles Value-Based Care Research Consortium. A pre- and poststudy questionnaire will be conducted to further evaluate participants' perspectives regarding their BP monitor. Linear mixed effects models will be used to compare the primary outcome measure between study arms. Mixed effects logistic regression models will be used to compare secondary outcome measures between study arms. RESULTS: The study will start enrolling participants in the second quarter of 2023 and will be completed by the first half of 2024. Results will be published by the end of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This pragmatic trial will contribute to the growing field of chronic care management using remote monitoring by answering whether a hypertension intervention coupled with an electronic health record integrated home BP monitor improves patients' hypertension better than a hypertension intervention with a nonintegrated BP monitor. The outcomes of this study may help health system decision makers determine whether to invest in integrated BP monitors for vulnerable patient populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05390502; clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05390502. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/45915.

Identifying Barriers to Successful Completion of Video Telemedicine Visits in Urology.

OBJECTIVE: The utilization of video telemedicine has dramatically increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, significant social and technological barriers have led to disparities in access. We aimed to identify factors associated with patient inability to successfully initiate a video visit across a high-volume urologic practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Video visit completion rates and patient characteristics were extracted from the electronic medical record and linked with census-level socioeconomic data. Associations between video visit failure were identified using multivariate regression modeling and random forest ensemble classification modeling. RESULTS: Six thousand eighty six patients and their first video visits were analyzed. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, Hispanic or Latino patients (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.31-0.89), patients insured by Medicare (OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.26-0.79) or Medicaid (OR 0.50, 95%CI 0.29-0.87), patients of low socioeconomic status (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.98-0.99), patients with an un-activated MyChart patient portal (OR 0.43, 95%CI 0.29-0.62), and patients unconfirmed at appointment reminder (OR 0.68, 95%CI 0.48-0.96) were significantly associated with video visit failure. Patients with primary diagnosis category of men's health (OR 47.96, 95%CI 10.24-856.35), and lower urinary tract syndromes (OR 2.69, 95%CI 1.66-4.51) were significantly associated with video visit success. Random forest analyses identified insurance status and socioeconomic status as the top predictors of video visit failure. CONCLUSION: An analysis of a urology video telemedicine cohort reveals clinical and demographic disparities in video visit completion and priorities for future interventions to ensure equity of access. Our study further suggests that specific urologic indications may play a role in success or failure of video visits.

Rapid Utilization of Telehealth in a Comprehensive Cancer Center as a Response to COVID-19: Cross-Sectional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic in March 2020 created unprecedented challenges in the provision of scheduled ambulatory cancer care. As a result, there has been a renewed focus on video-based telehealth consultations as a means to continue ambulatory care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to analyze the change in video visit volume at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Comprehensive Cancer Center in response to COVID-19 and compare patient demographics and appointment data from January 1, 2020, and in the 11 weeks after the transition to video visits. METHODS: Patient demographics and appointment data (dates, visit types, and departments) were extracted from the electronic health record reporting database. Video visits were performed using a HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act)-compliant video conferencing platform with a pre-existing workflow. RESULTS: In 17 departments and divisions at the UCSF Cancer Center, 2284 video visits were performed in the 11 weeks before COVID-19 changes were implemented (mean 208, SD 75 per week) and 12,946 video visits were performed in the 11-week post-COVID-19 period (mean 1177, SD 120 per week). The proportion of video visits increased from 7%-18% to 54%-72%, between the pre- and post-COVID-19 periods without any disparity based on race/ethnicity, primary language, or payor. CONCLUSIONS: In a remarkably brief period of time, we rapidly scaled the utilization of telehealth in response to COVID-19 and maintained access to complex oncologic care at a time of social distancing.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Telepalliative Care.

The field of telehealth is rapidly growing and evolving across medical specialties and health care settings. While additional data are needed, telepalliative care (the application of telehealth technologies to palliative care) may help address important challenges inherent to our specialty, such as geography and clinician staffing; the burden of traveling to brick-and-mortar clinics for patients who are symptomatic and/or functionally limited; and the timely assessment and management of symptoms. Telepalliative care can take many forms, including, but not limited to, video visits between clinicians and patients, smartphone applications to promote caregiver well-being, and remote patient symptom-monitoring programs. This article, created by experts in telehealth and palliative care, provides a review of the current evidence for telepalliative care and potential applications and practical tips for using the technology.

Telepsychiatry for Inpatient Consultations at a Separate Campus of an Academic Medical Center.

BACKGROUND: Many hospitals do not have regular access to psychiatry consult services. This is well understood as a common shortage at nonacademic community hospitals (especially in rural environments, and may also be a problem at noncontiguously located smaller hospitals that are affiliated with academic medical centers in urban settings. The authors sought to deliver timely inpatient psychiatric consultation-liaison services via telemedicine to a local but physically separated hospital affiliated with an academic medical center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors collaborated with an office dedicated to the advancement of telemedicine technology at their academic medical center. They developed a telemedicine-based care model to deliver inpatient consultation-liaison psychiatry consultations to an affiliated (but physically separate) small academic hospital that did not have its own on-site consultation-liaison psychiatry team. RESULTS: The authors were able to successfully complete 30 consultations, each within 24 h. Only 1 patient was ultimately unwilling to participate in the telemedicine interview. As consultations were accomplished on same day as request, patient length of stay was unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that telemedicine is a viable model for inpatient consultation-liaison psychiatry services to hospitals without on-site psychiatry resources and represents a viable alternative model of service delivery.