Family Caregiver Comfort with Telehealth Technologies: Differences by Race and Ethnicity in a Cross-Sectional Survey.

Background: Telehealth has seen widespread use since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and 82% patients required assistance in accessing their telehealth appointments. This assistance commonly comes from a family caregiver who may or may not be comfortable using the technologies associated with telehealth. The objective of our study was to analyze a demographically representative survey of U.S. family caregivers to understand the level of comfort using telehealth technologies among family caregivers. Methods: A secondary analysis of survey data collected during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Level of caregiver comfort using computers, smartphones, and tablets was determined through three Likert-style questions. Proportional odds logistic regression was used to understand the associations between demographic variables and level of caregiver comfort using each technology, when adjusting for covariates. Results: A total of 340 caregivers were included in the analysis. Compared with non-Hispanic white caregivers, Asian caregivers had higher odds (odds ratio [OR] 3.14; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36, 8.02; p = 0.01) of expressing comfort using computers; black caregivers (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.21, 0.98; p = 0.04) and Hispanic caregivers (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.17, 0.79; p = 0.01) expressed lower odds of comfort using smartphones; and Asian caregivers had higher odds (OR 4.64; 95% CI 2.05, 11.69; p = 0.001) of expressing comfort using tablets. Conclusion and Implications: There are identified disparities in the level of technological comfort using computers, smartphones, and tablets by different racial and ethnic groups. Health systems should consider early stakeholder involvement in the design of telehealth technologies, culturally responsive training materials on telehealth technology use to reduce disparities in comfort using telehealth technologies.

The Evolution of Primary Care Telehealth Disparities During COVID-19: Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth has become widely used as a novel way to provide outpatient care during the COVID-19 pandemic, but data about telehealth use in primary care remain limited. Studies in other specialties raise concerns that telehealth may be widening existing health care disparities, requiring further scrutiny of trends in telehealth use. OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to further characterize sociodemographic differences in primary care via telehealth compared to in-person office visits before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and determine if these disparities changed throughout 2020. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a large US academic center with 46 primary care practices from April-December 2019 to April-December 2020. Data were subdivided into calendar quarters and compared to determine evolving disparities throughout the year. We queried and compared billed outpatient encounters in General Internal Medicine and Family Medicine via binary logic mixed effects regression model and estimated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. We used sex, race, and ethnicity of the patient attending each encounter as fixed effects. We analyzed socioeconomic status of patients in the institution's primary county based on the patient's residence zip code. RESULTS: A total of 81,822 encounters in the pre-COVID-19 time frame and 47,994 encounters in the intra-COVID-19 time frame were analyzed; in the intra-COVID-19 time frame, a total of 5322 (11.1%) of encounters were telehealth encounters. Patients living in zip code areas with high utilization rate of supplemental nutrition assistance were less likely to use primary care in the intra-COVID-19 time frame (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98; P=.006). Encounters with the following patients were less likely to be via telehealth compared to in-person office visits: patients who self-identified as Asian (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.86) and Nepali (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.19-0.72), patients insured by Medicare (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.88), and patients living in zip code areas with high utilization rate of supplemental nutrition assistance (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99). Many of these disparities persisted throughout the year. Although there was no statistically significant difference in telehealth use for patients insured by Medicaid throughout the whole year, subanalysis of quarter 4 found encounters with patients insured by Medicaid were less likely to be via telehealth (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.97; P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Telehealth was not used equally by all patients within primary care throughout the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically by patients who self-identified as Asian and Nepali, insured by Medicare, and living in zip code areas with low socioeconomic status. As the COVID-19 pandemic and telehealth infrastructure change, it is critical we continue to reassess the use of telehealth. Institutions should continue to monitor disparities in telehealth access and advocate for policy changes that may improve equity.

Disparities in spatial accessibility of primary care in Louisiana: From physical to virtual accessibility.

Telehealth has been widely employed and has transformed how healthcare is delivered in the United States as a result of COVID-19 pandemic. While telehealth is utilized and encouraged to reduce the cost and travel burden for access to healthcare, there are debates on whether telehealth can promote equity in healthcare services by narrowing the gap among diverse groups. Using the Two-Step Floating Catchment Area (2SFCA) and Two-Step Virtual Catchment Area (2SVCA) methods, this study compares the disparities of physical and virtual access to primary care physicians (PCPs) in Louisiana. Both physical and virtual access to PCPs exhibit similar spatial patterns with higher scores concentrated in urban areas, followed by low-density and rural areas. However, the two accessibility measures diverge where broadband availability and affordability come to play an important role. Residents in rural areas experience additive disadvantage of even more limited telehealth accessibility than physical accessibility due to lack of broadband service provision. Areas with greater Black population proportions tend to have better physical accessibility, but such an advantage is eradicated for telehealth accessibility because of lower broadband subscription rates in these neighborhoods. Both physical and virtual accessibility scores decline in neighborhoods with higher Area Deprivation Index (ADI) values, and the disparity is further widened for in virtual accessibility compared to than physical accessibility. The study also examines how factors such as urbanicity, Black population proportion, and ADI interact in their effects on disparities of the two accessibility measures.

Incorporating broadband durability in measuring geographic access to health care in the era of telehealth: A case example of the 2-step virtual catchment area (2SVCA) Method.

The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic has expanded telehealth utilization in unprecedented ways and has important implications for measuring geographic access to healthcare services. Established measures of geographic access to care have focused on the spatial impedance of patients in seeking health care that pertains to specific transportation modes and do not account for the underlying broadband network that supports telemedicine and e-health. To be able to measure the impact of telehealth on healthcare access, we created a pilot augmentation of existing methods to incorporate measures of broadband accessibility to measure geographic access to telehealth. A reliable measure of telehealth accessibility is important to enable policy analysts to assess whether the increasing prevalence of telehealth may help alleviate the disparities in healthcare access in rural areas and for disadvantaged populations, or exacerbate the existing gaps as they experience "double burdens."