Examining differences in time to appointment and no-show rates between rural telehealth users and non-users.

Background: Telehealth has undergone widespread implementation since 2020 and is considered an invaluable tool to improve access to healthcare, particularly in rural areas. However, telehealth's applicability may be limited for certain populations including those who live in rural, medically underserved communities. While broadband access is a recognized barrier, other important factors including age and education influence a person's ability or preference to engage with telehealth via video telehealth or a patient portal. It remains unclear the degree to which these digital technologies lead to disparities in access to care. Purpose: The purpose of this analysis is to determine if access to healthcare differs for telehealth users compared with non-users. Methods: Using electronic health record data, we evaluated differences in "time to appointment" and "no-show rates" between telehealth users and non-users within an integrated healthcare network between August 2021 and January 2022. We limited analysis to patient visits in endocrinology or outpatient behavioral health departments. We analyzed new patients and established patients separately. Results: Telehealth visits were associated with shorter time to appointment for new and established patients in endocrinology and established patients in behavioral health, as well as with lower no-show rates for established patients in both departments. Conclusions: The findings suggest that those who are unwilling or unable to engage with telehealth may have more difficulty accessing timely care.

Trends in telehealth use among a cohort of rural patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Objective: Rural populations faced unique challenges to healthcare access during the COVID-19 pandemic. This analysis assesses trends in digital health technology use at the onset of the pandemic and describes digital health behaviors among a cohort of patients within a rural integrated healthcare network throughout the first 3 years of the pandemic. Methods: We used data from both the electronic health record (EHR) and a patient survey. EHR data was used to longitudinally assess change over time in patient portal use and telehealth visits. Survey responses were used to provide additional context. Results: Telehealth appointments peaked in the first quarter of 2020 at 28% of all office visits, before leveling off to 8-10% in 2022. Women and those younger than 65 were more likely to have participated in telehealth appointments. Active patient portal users increased from 34.1% in January 2019 to 63.7% in January 2022. There were no differences noted in portal use trends based on rurality. Conclusions: Our findings corroborate previous research, as well as add context regarding digital health technology use throughout the COVID pandemic in a rural patient population. Future research must focus on understanding constraints to digital health expansion in order to continue providing safe, equitable care.

Frequency of satisfaction and dissatisfaction with practice among rural-based, group-employed physicians and non-physician practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Widespread dissatisfaction among United States (U.S.) clinicians could endanger ongoing reforms. Practitioners in rural/underserved areas withstand stressors that are unique to or accentuated in those settings. Medical professionals employed by integrating delivery systems are often distressed by the cacophony of organizational change(s) that such consolidation portends. We investigated the factors associated with dis/satisfaction with rural practice among doctors/non-physician practitioners employed by an integrated healthcare delivery network serving 9 counties of upstate New York, during a time of organizational transition. METHODS: We linked administrative data about practice units with cross-sectional data from a self-administered multi-dimensional questionnaire that contained practitioner demographics plus valid scales assessing autonomy/relatedness needs, risk aversion, tolerance for uncertainty/ambiguity, meaningfulness of patient care, and workload. We targeted medical professionals on the institutional payroll for inclusion. We excluded those who retired, resigned or were fired during the study launch, plus members of the advisory board and research team. Fixed-effects beta regressions were performed to test univariate associations between each factor and the percent of time a provider was dis/satisfied. Factors that manifested significant fixed effects were entered into multivariate, inflated beta regression models of the proportion of time that practitioners were dis/satisfied, incorporating clustering by practice unit as a random effect. RESULTS: Of the 473 eligible participants. 308 (65.1 %) completed the questionnaire. 59.1 % of respondents were doctoral-level; 40.9 % mid-level practitioners. Practitioners with heavier workloads and/or greater uncertainty intolerance were less likely to enjoy top-quintile satisfaction; those deriving greater meaning from practice were more likely. Higher meaningfulness and gratified relational needs increased one's likelihood of being in the lowest quintile of dissatisfaction; heavier workload and greater intolerance of uncertainty reduced that likelihood. Practitioner demographics and most practice unit characteristics did not manifest any independent effect. CONCLUSIONS: Mutable factors, such as workload, work meaningfulness, relational needs, uncertainty/ambiguity tolerance, and risk-taking attitudes displayed the strongest association with practitioner satisfaction/dissatisfaction, independent of demographics and practice unit characteristics. Organizational efforts should be dedicated to a redesign of group-employment models, including more equitable division of clinical labor, building supportive peer networks, and uncertainty/risk tolerance coaching, to improve the quality of work life among rural practitioners.

Validation of Single-Item Screening Measures for Provider Burnout in a Rural Health Care Network.

We validated three single-item measures for emotional exhaustion (EE) and depersonalization (DP) among rural physician/nonphysician practitioners. We linked cross-sectional survey data (on provider demographics, satisfaction, resilience, and burnout) with administrative information from an integrated health care network (1 academic medical center, 6 community hospitals, 31 clinics, and 19 school-based health centers) in an eight-county underserved area of upstate New York. In total, 308 physicians and advanced-practice clinicians completed a self-administered, multi-instrument questionnaire (65.1% response rate). Significant proportions of respondents reported high EE (36.1%) and DP (9.9%). In multivariable linear mixed models, scores on EE/DP subscales of the Maslach Burnout Inventory were regressed on each single-item measure. The Physician Work-Life Study's single-item measure (classifying 32.8% of respondents as burning out/completely burned out) was correlated with EE and DP (Spearman's ρ = .72 and .41, p < .0001; Kruskal-Wallis χ(2) = 149.9 and 56.5, p < .0001, respectively). In multivariable models, it predicted high EE (but neither low EE nor low/high DP). EE/DP single items were correlated with parent subscales (Spearman's ρ = .89 and .81, p < .0001; Kruskal-Wallis χ(2) = 230.98 and 197.84, p < .0001, respectively). In multivariable models, the EE item predicted high/low EE, whereas the DP item predicted only low DP. Therefore, the three single-item measures tested varied in effectiveness as screeners for EE/DP dimensions of burnout.