Financial and Clinical Impact of Virtual Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Difference-in-Differences Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Virtual care (VC) and remote patient monitoring programs were deployed widely during the COVID-19 pandemic. Deployments were heterogeneous and evolved as the pandemic progressed, complicating subsequent attempts to quantify their impact. The unique arrangement of the US Military Health System (MHS) enabled direct comparison between facilities that did and did not implement a standardized VC program. The VC program enrolled patients symptomatic for COVID-19 or at risk for severe disease. Patients' vital signs were continuously monitored at home with a wearable device (Current Health). A central team monitored vital signs and conducted daily or twice-daily reviews (the nurse-to-patient ratio was 1:30). OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to describe the operational model of a VC program for COVID-19, evaluate its financial impact, and detail its clinical outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective difference-in-differences (DiD) evaluation that compared 8 military treatment facilities (MTFs) with and 39 MTFs without a VC program. Tricare Prime beneficiaries diagnosed with COVID-19 (Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Group 177 or International Classification of Diseases-10 codes U07.1/07.2) who were eligible for care within the MHS and aged 21 years and or older between December 2020 and December 2021 were included. Primary outcomes were length of stay and associated cost savings; secondary outcomes were escalation to physical care from home, 30-day readmissions after VC discharge, adherence to the wearable, and alarms per patient-day. RESULTS: A total of 1838 patients with COVID-19 were admitted to an MTF with a VC program of 3988 admitted to the MHS. Of these patients, 237 (13%) were enrolled in the VC program. The DiD analysis indicated that centers with the program had a 12% lower length of stay averaged across all COVID-19 patients, saving US $2047 per patient. The total cost of equipping, establishing, and staffing the VC program was estimated at US $3816 per day. Total net savings were estimated at US $2.3 million in the first year of the program across the MHS. The wearables were activated by 231 patients (97.5%) and were monitored through the Current Health platform for a total of 3474 (median 7.9, range 3.2-16.5) days. Wearable adherence was 85% (IQR 63%-94%). Patients triggered a median of 1.6 (IQR 0.7-5.2) vital sign alarms per patient per day; 203 (85.7%) were monitored at home and then directly discharged from VC; 27 (11.4%) were escalated to a physical hospital bed as part of their initial admission. There were no increases in 30-day readmissions or emergency department visits. CONCLUSIONS: Monitored patients were adherent to the wearable device and triggered a manageable number of alarms/day for the monitoring-team-to-patient ratio. Despite only enrolling 13% of COVID-19 patients at centers where it was available, the program offered substantial savings averaged across all patients in those centers without adversely affecting clinical outcomes.

Advanced Virtual Support for Operational Forces: A 3-Year Summary.

INTRODUCTION: The Military Health System mission is to provide medical care throughout the globe to service members and beneficiaries. To achieve this mission in the most austere of locations, telemedical support is an essential force multiplier when robust in-person medical support is not feasible. This led to the development of a telemedical solution initially known as the Virtual Critical Care Consultation service which provided tele-critical care assistance to downrange providers. The VC3 system then expanded to include multiple medical specialties available for consultation. The current version of this telemedical solution is the ADvanced VIrtual Support for OpeRational Forces (ADVISOR) program which is a synchronous and asynchronous telemedicine system that was developed to provide 24/7 remote expert support to military clinicians engaged in casualty care in austere and operational environments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This manuscript reviews the ADVISOR program data collected from 2017 to 2020 and provides a rough order of magnitude for return on investment. We reviewed data collected by Operational Virtual Health Reports and Operational Virtual Health Evaluations following synchronous consultations. Part of the data reviewed was available patient demographic data, local caregiver information, the purpose of the consult, recommendations made during the consult, the technology used during the consult, and the patient disposition. They also recorded the evacuation plan for the patient and whether a medical evacuation was escalated (e.g. changed from routine to urgent, or from urgent to critical care air transport), downgraded (e.g. urgent to routine), or avoided altogether based on the telephonic consultation. RESULTS: There were a total of 156 real-world calls during the evaluation period. The total cost savings for these calls was $1,097,027 (3-year program costs of $909,973 less an average of $87,261+/- $28,633 per call or $2,007,000 total) from downgrading or avoidance of planned evacuations. The unmeasured value associated with ADVISOR consultations should also be commented on. For example, when evacuation plans are escalated based on remote expert consultation, it is probable that the escalation increases patient safety and may avoid medical complications that would result in longer term medical costs to the government. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the collected information, the financial return on investment has exceeded costs and the system is perceived as being valued added for both local caregivers and remote experts. The system appears to help optimize evacuation planning, specifically by downgrading or eliminating unnecessary evacuations.

Military Telehealth: A Model For Delivering Expertise To The Point Of Need In Austere And Operational Environments.

Austere clinical environments are those in which limited resources hamper the achievement of optimal patient outcomes. Operational environments are those in which caregivers and resources are at risk for harm. Military and civilian caregivers experience these environments in the context of war, natural disasters, humanitarian assistance missions, and mass casualty events. The military has a particular interest in enhancing local caregiver capabilities within austere and operational environments to improve casualty outcomes when evacuation is delayed or impossible, reduce the cost and the risk of unnecessary evacuations, enhance the medical response during aid missions, and increase combat effectiveness by keeping service members in the fight as long as possible. This article describes military telehealth as it relates to care in austere and operational environments, and it suggests implications for policy, particularly with respect to the current emphasis on telehealth solutions that might not be feasible in those settings.