A Cost Analysis of Medications Prescribed by Vascular Surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: Various pharmaceutical cost options have been developed by multiple companies such as GoodRx, Amazon Pharmacy, Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drugs (CPD), Health Warehouse, and Local Retail Pharmacies (LRP) to curb the cost of prescription medications prices that patients are having to bear. Vascular surgeons provide long-term continuity of care to patients with vascular disease who often require long-term medical management. This study sought to compare the different pharmaceutical options available for the most prescribed medications by vascular surgeons to their patients and to understand which of them are the most cost-effective. METHODS: The Medicare Part D catalog and vascular surgical literature were evaluated to identify which medications are most prescribed by vascular surgeons. The average price per tablet being paid by patients was identified using the Agency for Healthcare and Research database. The prices per tablet for each of the above pharmaceutical companies were found using online catalogs or coupons. The prices were then compared using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and t-tests. RESULTS: All four pharmaceutical cost options provide medication cost savings to patients compared to retail pharmacy costs. ANOVA showed that there were statistically significant differences amongst the different pharmaceutical cost options (F 15.44>2.36, P<.001). Mark Cuban CPD provided the most significant cost advantage over the other pharmaceutical options (p<0.01). On a national scale, medications prescribed by vascular surgeons through Mark Cuban CPD could provide a 52% cost reduction to patients with vascular disease with a potential annual savings of over $3 billion dollars for the selected medications. CONCLUSIONS: Cost Plus Drugs shows a strong potential for cost-savings for patients commonly prescribed medications by vascular surgeons. As a specialty which provides long-term care and establishes long-term relationships with its patients, vascular surgeons have the unique ability to impact their overall health in a meaningful way by limiting the financial burdens associated with vascular-based medication acquisition and utilization.

Impact of COVID-19 on patients undergoing scheduled procedures for chronic venous disease.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically altered the medical landscape. Various strategies have been employed to preserve hospital beds, personal protective equipment, and other resources to accommodate the surges of COVID-19 positive patients, hospital overcapacities, and staffing shortages. This has had a dramatic effect on vascular surgical practice. The objective of this study is to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical delays and adverse outcomes for patients with chronic venous disease scheduled to undergo elective operations. METHODS: The Vascular Surgery COVID-19 Collaborative (VASCC) was founded in March 2020 to evaluate the outcomes of patients with vascular disease whose operations were delayed. Modules were developed by vascular surgeon working groups and tested before implementation. A data analysis of outcomes of patients with chronic venous disease whose surgeries were postponed during the COVID-19 pandemic from March 2020 through February 2021 was performed for this study. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients from 12 institutions in the United States were included in the study. Indications for venous intervention were: 85.3% varicose veins, 10.7% varicose veins with venous ulceration, and 4.0% lipodermatosclerosis. One hundred two surgeries had successfully been completed at the time of data entry. The average length of the delay was 91 days, with a median of 78 days. Delays for venous ulceration procedures ranged from 38 to 208 days. No patients required an emergent intervention due to their venous disease, and no patients experienced major adverse events following their delayed surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions may be safely delayed for patients with venous disease requiring elective surgical intervention during the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding supports the American College of Surgeons' recommendations for the management of elective vascular surgical procedures. Office-based labs may be safe locations for continued treatment when resources are limited. Although the interventions can be safely postponed, the negative impact on quality of life warrants further investigation.

A Comparison between the Use of Patient-worn Virtual Reality in Wound Care and Hand Surgery: How Does Virtual Reality Work?

As virtual reality (VR) technology becomes smaller and more affordable, it is gaining in popularity as a tool to address the patient experience of pain and anxiety during invasive procedures. In this study, we explore the effect of VR on the patient experience in two clinical environments of different anxiety levels to propose a possible mechanism of VR on pain and anxiety reduction. Method: Twenty-five wound care patients were randomly assigned to either a VR group or non-virtual reality (NVR) group, singly blinded. Pre-debridement, peri-debridement, and immediately postdebridement anxiety, fun, and pain scores were collected using a Likert scale (0 = least; 10 = most) from each group of patients. These measurements were compared among the VR versus NVR group in the setting of routine wound debridement procedures. The results are compared with our previously published data on patients who underwent wide awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) hand surgery. Results: The WALANT surgery patients using VR experienced significant reduction in anxiety and increase in fun compared with the NVR group. In the wound debridement group with VR, there was improved fun, but no statistically significant reduction in pain or anxiety when compared with the NVR group. The mean score for anxiety was higher for awake hand surgery than for wound debridement cases (3.3 versus 1.7, P = 0.004). Conclusions: VR seems to be more effective in higher anxiety settings, could VR work via a neurological mechanism akin to the Melzack and Wall gate control theory of pain? VR may act primarily on the anxiety axis, providing negative feedback via cortical pathways to the amygdala.

Virtual Reality Improves Patient Experience and Anxiety During In-office Carpal Tunnel Release.

Background: This study examined how wide- awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) surgery in the office versus the standard operating room (OR) impacts patient experience, and the effect wide awake virtual reality (WAVR) has in conjunction with WALANT on patient experience. Methods: This is a patient-reported outcome study of patients undergoing carpal tunnel release by a single surgeon between August 2017 and March 2021. Patients were classified by location; traditional OR versus WALANT in-office. In-office patients were further classified by whether they chose to use WAVR or not. Patients rated overall experience, enjoyability, and anxiety using a Likert scale (1-7). Results: The online survey had a 44.8% response rate. OR patients were twice as likely to report a neutral or negative experience (23% versus 11%, P = 0.03), significantly lower enjoyment scores (44% versus 20%, P = 0.0007)' and higher anxiety (42% versus 26%, P = 0.04) compared with office-based WALANT patients. With the addition of WAVR, office patients reported higher enjoyment than those who did not use WAVR (85% versus 73%, P = 0.05). Patients reporting an anxiety disorder were more likely to choose WAVR when compared with patients without anxiety disorder (73.8% versus 56.4%). When they chose WAVR, they had greater anxiolysis (79% versus 47%, P = 0.01)' and increased enjoyment (90% versus 59%, P = 0.005). Conclusions: This study demonstrates improved patient experience in the office setting, further amplified by WAVR. Preexisting anxiety disorder is a positive predictive variable toward the patients' choice to use WAVR.

Society for Vascular Surgery appropriate use criteria for management of intermittent claudication.

The Society for Vascular Surgery appropriate use criteria (AUC) for the management of intermittent claudication were created using the RAND appropriateness method, a validated and standardized method that combines the best available evidence from medical literature with expert opinion, using a modified Delphi process. These criteria serve as a framework on which individualized patient and clinician shared decision-making can grow. These criteria are not absolute. AUC should not be interpreted as a requirement to administer treatments rated as appropriate (benefit outweighs risk). Nor should AUC be interpreted as a prohibition of treatments rated as inappropriate (risk outweighs benefit). Clinical situations will occur in which moderating factors, not included in these AUC, will shift the appropriateness level of a treatment for an individual patient. Proper implementation of AUC requires a description of those moderating patient factors. For scenarios with an indeterminate rating, clinician judgement combined with the best available evidence should determine the treatment strategy. These scenarios require mechanisms to track the treatment decisions and outcomes. AUC should be revisited periodically to ensure that they remain relevant. The panelists rated 2280 unique scenarios for the treatment of intermittent claudication (IC) in the aortoiliac, common femoral, and femoropopliteal segments in the round 2 rating. Of these, only nine (0.4%) showed a disagreement using the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry formula, indicating an exceptionally high degree of consensus among the panelists. Post hoc, the term "inappropriate" was replaced with the phrase "risk outweighs benefit." The term "appropriate" was also replaced with "benefit outweighs risk." The key principles for the management of IC reflected within these AUC are as follows. First, exercise therapy is the preferred initial management strategy for all patients with IC. Second, for patients who have not completed exercise therapy, invasive therapy might provide net a benefit for selected patients with IC who are nonsmokers, are taking optimal medical therapy, are considered to have a low physiologic and technical risk, and who are experiencing severe lifestyle limitations and/or a short walking distance. Third, considering the long-term durability of the currently available technology, invasive interventions for femoropopliteal disease should be reserved for patients with severe lifestyle limitations and a short walking distance. Fourth, in the common femoral segment, open common femoral endarterectomy will provide greater net benefit than endovascular intervention for the treatment of IC. Finally, in the infrapopliteal segment, invasive intervention for the treatment of IC is of unclear benefit and could be harmful.

Review and current update of robotic-assisted laparoscopic vascular surgery.

The field of vascular surgery is constantly evolving and is unsurpassed in its innovation and adoption of new technologies. Endovascular therapy has fundamentally changed the treatment paradigms for aneurysm and occlusive disease. As we continue to make advances in not only endovascular therapy, but also robotic surgery, artificial intelligence, and minimally invasive surgery, it is important that the vascular community stay at the forefront. Topics include the advantages of laparoscopic and robotic surgery over open surgery for aortic procedures, robotic versus laparoscopic aortic surgery, patient candidacy for robotic-assisted aortic surgery, and how to increase training and adoption of robotic-assisted laparoscopic aortic surgery. Future growth includes the development of new platforms and technologies, creation and validation of curriculum and virtual simulators, and conduction of randomized clinical trials to determine the best applications of robotics in vascular surgery.

Current applications of artificial intelligence in vascular surgery.

Basic foundations of artificial intelligence (AI) include analyzing large amounts of data, recognizing patterns, and predicting outcomes. At the core of AI are well-defined areas, such as machine learning, natural language processing, artificial neural networks, and computer vision. Although research and development of AI in health care is being conducted in many medical subspecialties, only a few applications have been implemented in clinical practice. This is true in vascular surgery, where applications are mostly in the translational research stage. These AI applications are being evaluated in the realms of vascular diagnostics, perioperative medicine, risk stratification, and outcome prediction, among others. Apart from the technical challenges of AI and research outcomes on safe and beneficial use in patient care, ethical issues and policy surrounding AI will present future challenges for its successful implementation. This review will give a brief overview and a basic understanding of AI and summarize the currently available and used clinical AI applications in vascular surgery.

A look to the future: Pandemic-induced digital technologies in vascular surgery.

Like many areas of medicine, vascular surgery has been transformed by the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic. Public health precautions to minimize disease transmission have led to reduced attendance at hospitals and clinics in elective and emergency settings; fewer face-to-face and hands-on clinical interactions; and increased reliance on telemedicine, virtual attendance, investigations, and digital therapeutics. However, a "silver lining" to the COVID-19 pandemic may be the mainstream acceptance and acceleration of telemedicine, remote monitoring, digital health technology, and three-dimensional technologies, such as three-dimensional printing and virtual reality, by connecting health care providers to patients in a safe, reliable, and timely manner, and supplanting face-to-face surgical simulation and training. This review explores the impact of these changes in the delivery of vascular surgical care.

Equal pay for equal work: Disparities in compensation in vascular surgery.

Physician compensation varies by specialty, gender, race, years in practice, type of practice, location, and individual productivity. We reviewed the disparities in compensation regarding the variation between medical and surgical specialties, between academic and private practice, between gender, race, and rank, and by practice location. The physician personal debt perspective was also considered to quantify the effect of disparities in compensation. Strategies toward eliminating the pay gap include salary transparency, pay equity audit, paid parental leave, mentoring, sponsorship, leadership, and promotion pathways. Pay parity is important because paying women less than men contributes to the gender pay gap, lowers pension contributions, and results in higher relative poverty in retirement. Pay parity will also affect motivation and relationships at work, ultimately contributing to a diverse workforce and business success. Rewarding all employees fairly is the right thing to do. As surgeons and leaders in medicine, establishing pay equity is a matter of ethical principle and integrity to further elevate our profession.

The initial experience and response of vascular surgeons in Michigan during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The unprecedented pandemic spread of the novel coronavirus has severely impacted the delivery of healthcare services in the United States and around the world, and has exposed a variety of inefficiencies in healthcare infrastructure. Some states have been disproportionately affected such as New York and Michigan. In fact, Detroit and its surrounding areas have been named as the initial Midwest epicenter where over 106,000 cases have been confirmed in April 2020. METHOD, RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Facilities in Southeast Michigan have served as the frontline of the pandemic in the Midwest and in order to cope with the surge, rapid, and in some cases, complete restructuring of care was mandatory to effect change and attempt to deal with the emerging crisis. We describe the initial experience and response of 4 large vascular surgery health systems in Michigan to COVID-19.

Effect of endovenous ablation assessment stratified by great saphenous vein size, gender, clinical severity, and patient-reported outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The policies of insurance carriers have used the truncal vein size as a criterion for coverage. The objective of the present study was to compare the effect of great saphenous vein (GSV) size ≥5 mm vs <5 mm on patient presentation and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients in a national cohort were prospectively captured in the Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry. From January 2015 to October 2017, the Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry database was queried for all patients who had undergone varicose vein procedures. The CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic) classification, Venous Clinical Severity Score, and patient-reported outcomes were compared by GSV size (<5 mm, group 1; ≥5 mm, group 2) before and after the procedures. A 2-sample Wilcoxon test was performed to assess the differences between the 2 groups stratified by GSV size. To assess for postoperative improvement, a matched-pairs Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed for each group separately. RESULTS: During the study period, 5757 vein ablation procedures had been performed for GSV: 770 for GSV size <5 mm and 4987 for GSV size ≥5 mm. Patients in group 1 were more likely to be women (81.7% vs 68.4%; P = .001) and older (56.8 vs 55.6 years; P = .012). The CEAP clinical class was more advanced in group 2 than in group 1 (P = .001). The maximal GSV diameter in group 2 was significantly greater than in group 1 (8.32 vs 3.86 mm; P = .001); 64% of group 2 and 59.2% of group 1 had undergone radiofrequency thermal ablation (P = .001). No mortalities occurred in either group. Group 2 had more complications postoperatively (0.6% vs 0%; P = .027), required postoperative anticoagulation (8.8% vs 5%, P = .001), developed partial recanalization (0.8% vs 0.3%; P = .001), and missed more work days (2.32 vs 1.6 days) compared with group 1. A similar rate of hematoma developed in both groups, but group 1 had a higher rate of paresthesia. Both groups had improvement in the Venous Clinical Severity Score and HASTI (heaviness, achiness, swelling, throbbing, itching) score. The degree of symptomatic improvement between the 2 groups was similar. CONCLUSIONS: All patients demonstrated improvement in both clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes after endovenous ablation, regardless of GSV size. Patients with a preoperative GSV size ≥5 mm experienced similar improvement in symptoms but an increased complication rate. Patients with a smaller vein size should not be denied intervention or coverage by vein size.

Contemporary management of chronic indwelling inferior vena cava filters.

OBJECTIVE: Despite increasing retrieval rates of the inferior vena cava (IVC) filter, less than one-third are removed within the recommended timeline. Prolonged filter dwell times may increase the technical difficulty of retrieval and filter-related complications. We sought to evaluate the contemporary outcomes of patients with chronic indwelling IVC filters at a tertiary care center. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed from August 2015 through August 2019 of all patients who were referred for removal of a prolonged IVC filter with a dwell time >1 year. Descriptive analysis was used to evaluate patients' characteristics and procedural outcomes, which were reviewed through electronic medical records. Data were expressed as median with interquartile range (IQR) or number and percentage, as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were identified with a median filter dwell time of 10.0 years (IQR, 6-13 years); 34 patients underwent IVC filter removal, and 13 patients refused retrieval. The median age of patients was 54.9 years (IQR, 42.5-64.0 years); the majority were female (57%) and white (53%). The most common indication for filter placement was high risk despite anticoagulation (49%), followed by venous thromboembolism prophylaxis (21%). The majority of patients were symptomatic (72%). If symptomatic, the most common reason for retrieval was IVC penetration (94%), and the chief complaint was pain (56%). Retrieval success was 97%, with a median length of stay of 0 days. The majority of retrievals were performed through an endovascular approach (97%). There was one postprocedural complication (3%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite prolonged dwell times, IVC filter retrieval can be performed safely and effectively in carefully selected patients at a tertiary referral center.

Outcome benefit of arterial duplex stent imaging after superficial femoral artery stent implantation.

OBJECTIVE: In-stent stenosis is a frequent complication of superficial femoral artery (SFA) endovascular intervention and can lead to stent occlusion or symptom recurrence. Arterial duplex stent imaging (ADSI) can be used in the surveillance for recurrent stenosis; however, its uniform application is controversial. In this study, we aimed to determine, in patients undergoing SFA stent implantation, whether surveillance with ADSI yielded a better outcome than in those with only ankle-brachial index (ABI) follow-up. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing SFA stent implantation for occlusive disease at a tertiary care referral center between 2009 and 2016. The patients were divided into those with ADSI and those with ABI follow-up only. Life-table analysis comparing stent patency, major adverse limb events (MALEs), limb salvage, and mortality between groups was performed. RESULTS: There were 248 patients with SFA stent implantation included, 160 in the ADSI group and 88 in the ABI group. Groups were homogeneous in clinical indications of claudication and critical limb-threatening ischemia (for ADSI, 39% and 61%; for ABI, 38% and 62%; P = .982) and TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus class A, B, C, and D lesions (for ADSI, 17%, 45%, 16%, and 22%; for ABI, 21%, 43%, 16%, and 20%; P = .874). Primary patency was similar between groups at 12, 36, and 56 months (ADSI, 65%, 43%, and 32%; ABI, 69%, 34%, and 34%; P = .770), whereas ADSI patients showed an improved assisted primary patency (84%, 68%, and 54%) vs ABI patients (76%, 38%, and 38%; P = .008) and secondary patency. There was greater freedom from MALEs in the ADSI group (91%, 76%, and 64%) vs the ABI group (79%, 46%, and 46%; P < .001) at 12, 36, and 56 months of follow-up. ADSI patients were more likely to undergo an endovascular procedure as their initial post-SFA stent implantation intervention (P = .001), whereas ABI patients were more likely to undergo an amputation (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In SFA stent implantation, patients with ADSI follow-up demonstrate an advantage in assisted primary patency and secondary patency and are more likely to undergo an endovascular reintervention. These factors are likely to have effected a decrease in MALEs, indicating the benefit of a more universal adoption of post-SFA stent implantation follow-up ADSI.

Telemedicine platforms and their use in the coronavirus disease-19 era to deliver comprehensive vascular care.

Implementation of telemedicine for patient encounters optimizes personal safety and allows for continuity of patient care. Embracing telehealth reduces the use of personal protective equipment and other resources consumed during in-person visits. The use of telehealth has increased to historic levels in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Telehealth may be a key modality to fight against COVID-19, allowing us to take care of patients, conserve personal protective equipment, and protect health care workers all while minimizing the risk of viral spread. We must not neglect vascular health issues while the coronavirus pandemic continues to flood many hospitals and keep people confined to their homes. Patients are not immune to diseases and illnesses such as stroke, critical limb ischemia, and deep vein thrombosis while being confined to their homes and afraid to visit hospitals. Emerging from the COVID-19 crisis, incorporating telemedicine into routine medical care is transformative. By leveraging digital technology, the authors discuss their experience with the implementation, workflow, coding, and reimbursement issues of telehealth during the COVID-19 era.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic placement of extravascular stent for nutcracker syndrome.

A 20-year-old man complained of debilitating left flank pain for 6 months with an episode of gross hematuria. Computed tomography showed compression of the left renal vein between the aorta and superior mesenteric artery with an aortomesenteric angle of 25 degrees. Venography showed a gradient of 3 mm Hg across the compression and 94.4% luminal compression of the left renal vein. After discussion of all surgical and endovascular options, robot-assisted laparoscopic placement of an extravascular cuff around the left renal vein was performed using the da Vinci X Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, Calif). The patient did well with full resolution of the left flank pain.

Robot-assisted removal of inferior vena cava filter.

This case describes a 57-year-old morbidly obese woman with complications of a permanent Bard inferior vena cava (IVC) filter (BD Bard, Covington, Ga) placed in 2005. She complained of recurrent abdominal pain for 6 years associated with constipation, nausea, and bloating. Computed tomography venography showed an IVC filter with malposition, strut fracture, and extrusion, and a fractured strut protruded outside of the vena cava, adjacent to the distal right common iliac artery. The da Vinci Xi Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, Calif) was used to remove the IVC filter and its displaced fractured strut. The operation time was 189 minutes, with an estimated blood loss of 200 mL. She was discharged home on postoperative day 2 with no complications. She had complete resolution of abdominal pain at her follow-up appointment.

Comparison of virtual visit versus traditional clinic for management of varicose veins.

Introduction: The objective of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with varicose veins managed in the telemedicine clinic and traditional clinic. Methods: Retrospective analysis of all vein procedures in the institutional Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry (VQI VVR) was performed from January 2015 to August 2017. Patients were divided into two groups: Telemedicine versus Traditional Clinic. Comparison data included patient demographics, past medical history, clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes and postoperative complications. Statistical testing included chi-square test for categorical variables and student t-test for continuous variables using the SPSS statistical software. Results: A total of 1034 varicose vein procedures were performed during the 31-month study period. There were 75 virtual encounters in the Telemedicine Clinic (Group A) and 959 face-to-face encounters in the Traditional Clinic (Group B). Most of the demographics characteristics were clinically similar in both groups. Comparing Group A and Group B, there were no differences in age, sex, race and body mass index. Early 3-month follow up was 100% in Group A and 90.7% in Group B. Both groups had low complication rates of haematoma (1.3% vs 0.3%, p = 0.884), paraesthesia (1.3% vs 0.6%, p = 0.767) and recanalisation (1.3% vs 4.0%, p = 0.383) during the early follow up period. Discussion: Synchronous virtual visits for patient care are feasible for the management of chronic venous disease. Patients with varicose veins who choose to undergo telemedicine evaluations have similar pre-operative demographics, clinical classification and patient outcomes.

Analysis of Outpatient Telemedicine Reimbursement in an Integrated Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Current reimbursement policy surrounding telemedicine has been cited as a barrier for the adaptation of this care model. The objective of this study is to analyze the reimbursement figures for outpatient telemedicine consultation in vascular surgery. METHODS: Patients first underwent synchronous telemedicine visits after receiving point-of-care ultrasound at one of 3 satellite locations of Henry Ford Health System in Michigan. Visit types included new, return, and postoperative patients. Reimbursement information related to payor, adjustment, denial, paid and outstanding balances were recorded for each telemedicine visit. Then, using an enterprise data warehouse, a retrospective analysis was performed for the aforementioned telemedicine visits. The data were analyzed to determine the outcome of total billed charges, number of denied claims, reimbursement per payor, reimbursement per patient, and out-of-pocket costs to the patients. RESULTS: Among 184 virtual clinical encounters, the payors included Aetna US Healthcare, Blue Advantage, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Cofinity Plan, Health Alliance Plan, HAP Medicare Advantage, Humana Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, Medicare, Molina Medicaid HMO, United Healthcare, Blue Care Network, Aetna Better Health of Michigan, Priority Health, and self-pay. Among the 15 payors, reimbursement ranged from 0% to 67% of the total charges billed. Among the 184 virtual visits, a grand total of $22,145 was collected or an average of $120.35 per virtual encounter. The breakdown of charges billed was 40% adjusted, 41% paid by insurance, 10% paid by patient, and 13% denied. There were 27 total denials (15%). Denial of payment included telehealth and nontelehealth reasons, citing noncovered charges, payment included for other prior services, new patient quality not met, and not covered by payor. The average out-of-pocket cost to patients was $12.59 per visit. CONCLUSIONS: These reimbursement data validate the economic potential within this new platform of healthcare delivery. As our experience with the business model grows, we expect to see an increase in reimbursement from private payors and acceptance from patients. Within a tertiary care system, telemedicine for chronic vascular disease has proven to be a viable means to reach a broader population base, and without significant cost to the patients.

Outpatient Telemedicine Program in Vascular Surgery Reduces Patient Travel Time, Cost, and Environmental Pollutant Emissions.

BACKGROUND: We analyze the impact of outpatient telemedicine services on the travel burden of vascular surgery patients with regard to distance, time, and cost, as well as the emission of environmental pollutants. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was used to compare the patient travel expenditure and environmental impact associated with telemedicine encounters versus hypothetical in-person traditional consultations for all outpatient virtual care encounters with vascular surgery patients from October 2015 to October 2017. The primary outcomes measured were travel distance saved, travel time saved, travel costs saved, reduction in fuel consumption, and reduction in environmental pollutant emission. RESULTS: Over a two-year period, 146 outpatient telemedicine encounters were conducted among 87 unique patients (61 females, 26 males; mean age, 60 ± 13 years). The average one-way distance saved by the utilization of telemedicine services was 15.6 ± 6.3 miles, with an average roundtrip savings of 31.2 miles. The average one-way travel time saved was 19.5 ± 9.2 minutes, with an average roundtrip savings of 39 minutes. By using telemedicine services, these vascular surgery patients saved an average of $4.26 in gas and parking costs at each telemedicine encounter. The total reduction in passenger vehicle emission of environmental pollutants, including carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitric oxides, and volatile organic compounds was 1632 kg, 42,867 g, 3160 g, and 4715 g, respectively, with a total of 194 gallons of gas saved from driving. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of telemedicine services reduces the travel distance, time, and costs for vascular surgery patients. Outpatient telemedicine programs may also provide environmental benefit through the reduction of greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions.