Patient Characteristics Associated With Telemedicine Access for Primary and Specialty Ambulatory Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has required a shift in health care delivery platforms, necessitating a new reliance on telemedicine. Objective: To evaluate whether inequities are present in telemedicine use and video visit use for telemedicine visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, a retrospective medical record review was conducted from March 16 to May 11, 2020, of all patients scheduled for telemedicine visits in primary care and specialty ambulatory clinics at a large academic health system. Age, race/ethnicity, sex, language, median household income, and insurance type were all identified from the electronic medical record. Main Outcomes and Measures: A successfully completed telemedicine visit and video (vs telephone) visit for a telemedicine encounter. Multivariable models were used to assess the association between sociodemographic factors, including sex, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and language, and the use of telemedicine visits, as well as video use specifically. Results: A total of 148 402 unique patients (86 055 women [58.0%]; mean [SD] age, 56.5 [17.7] years) had scheduled telemedicine visits during the study period; 80 780 patients (54.4%) completed visits. Of 78 539 patients with completed visits in which visit modality was specified, 35 824 (45.6%) were conducted via video, whereas 24 025 (56.9%) had a telephone visit. In multivariable models, older age (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83-0.88] for those aged 55-64 years; aOR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.72-0.78] for those aged 65-74 years; aOR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.64-0.70] for those aged ≥75 years), Asian race (aOR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.66-0.73]), non-English language as the patient's preferred language (aOR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78-0.90]), and Medicaid insurance (aOR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.89-0.97]) were independently associated with fewer completed telemedicine visits. Older age (aOR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.76-0.82] for those aged 55-64 years; aOR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.74-0.83] for those aged 65-74 years; aOR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.46-0.53] for those aged ≥75 years), female sex (aOR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.90-0.95]), Black race (aOR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.62-0.68]), Latinx ethnicity (aOR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.83-0.97]), and lower household income (aOR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.54-0.60] for income <$50 000; aOR, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.85-0.92], for $50 000-$100 000) were associated with less video use for telemedicine visits. These results were similar across medical specialties. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients scheduled for primary care and medical specialty ambulatory telemedicine visits at a large academic health system during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, older patients, Asian patients, and non-English-speaking patients had lower rates of telemedicine use, while older patients, female patients, Black, Latinx, and poorer patients had less video use. Inequities in accessing telemedicine care are present, which warrant further attention.

A behavioral economics intervention to encourage epinephrine-carrying among food-allergic adults: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults with food allergies are at increased risk of adverse events, including death from anaphylaxis. Epinephrine is the cornerstone of emergency response, yet few individuals with serious food allergies consistently carry their emergency medication. Behavioral economics offers promising, previously untapped opportunities for behavior change in this arena. OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of modest financial incentives in promoting the carrying of epinephrine and to evaluate the acceptability of text messaging for delivering reminders and key health messages to young adults with food allergies. METHODS: A mixed-methods randomized controlled trial in young adults with food allergies investigated the carrying of epinephrine auto-injectors using financial incentives plus text message reminders vs text message reminders alone. Epinephrine carriage was assessed 10 times during the 49-day intervention using rapid-reply cell phone photographs plus daily code words. RESULTS: The intervention (financial incentive) group had their epinephrine auto-injectors at 54% of check-ins vs 27% of check-ins in the control (text-only) group (P = .023). Participants in the 2 groups consistently reported favorable impressions of text messaging as a desirable, unobtrusive way to receive information and support for food allergy management. CONCLUSION: Although the intervention and control groups reported favorable impressions of text message-based reminder systems, the intervention group performed significantly better than the control group on a photograph-based measurement of epinephrine carriage. There remained ample room for improvement in the 2 groups given the goal of consistent, uninterrupted epinephrine carriage by people with potentially life-threatening food allergies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02354729.