Travel Distance Between Participants in US Telemedicine Sessions With Estimates of Emissions Savings: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Digital health and telemedicine are potentially important strategies to decrease health care's environmental impact and contribution to climate change by reducing transportation-related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. However, we currently lack robust national estimates of emissions savings attributable to telemedicine. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) determine the travel distance between participants in US telemedicine sessions and (2) estimate the net reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions attributable to telemedicine in the United States, based on national observational data describing the geographical characteristics of telemedicine session participants. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study of telemedicine sessions in the United States between January 1, 2022, and February 21, 2023, on the doxy.me platform. Using Google Distance Matrix, we determined the median travel distance between participating providers and patients for a proportional sample of sessions. Further, based on the best available public data, we estimated the total annual emissions costs and savings attributable to telemedicine in the United States. RESULTS: The median round trip travel distance between patients and providers was 49 (IQR 21-145) miles. The median CO2 emissions savings per telemedicine session was 20 (IQR 8-59) kg CO2). Accounting for the energy costs of telemedicine and US transportation patterns, among other factors, we estimate that the use of telemedicine in the United States during the years 2021-2022 resulted in approximate annual CO2 emissions savings of 1,443,800 metric tons. CONCLUSIONS: These estimates of travel distance and telemedicine-associated CO2 emissions costs and savings, based on national data, indicate that telemedicine may be an important strategy in reducing the health care sector's carbon footprint.

Narrative review of telemedicine applications in decentralized research.

Telemedicine enables critical human communication and interaction between researchers and participants in decentralized research studies. There is a need to better understand the overall scope of telemedicine applications in clinical research as the basis for further research. This narrative, nonsystematic review of the literature sought to review and discuss applications of telemedicine, in the form of synchronous videoconferencing, in clinical research. We searched PubMed to identify relevant literature published between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2023. Two independent screeners assessed titles and abstracts for inclusion, followed by single-reviewer full-text screening, and we organized the literature into core themes through consensus discussion. We screened 1044 publications for inclusion. Forty-eight publications met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. We identified six core themes to serve as the structure for the narrative review: infrastructure and training, recruitment, informed consent, assessment, monitoring, and engagement. Telemedicine applications span all stages of clinical research from initial planning and recruitment to informed consent and data collection. While the evidence base for using telemedicine in clinical research is not well-developed, existing evidence suggests that telemedicine is a potentially powerful tool in clinical research.

Will the United States pass on telemedicine progress?

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal and state health policies allowed temporary flexibilities for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, leading to a sharp increase in telemedicine use. However, many of the flexibilities that enabled innovation and growth in telemedicine continue temporarily since the federal emergency declaration ended in May 2023, and the United States has not made permanent decisions about telemedicine policy. Analysts have raised concerns about increased spending, program integrity, safety, and equity, and recommend strengthening oversight. Methods: Here, we argue that we must continue the flexibilities to better understand telemedicine's quality, safety, and outcomes, and until the United States can develop an evidence-based digital health strategy. A premature regression to pre-pandemic telemedicine policies risks unintended consequences. Conclusion: We must continue the current policy flexibilities, safeguard against fraud and abuse, and immediately prioritize research and evaluation of telemedicine's quality, safety, and outcomes, to avoid unintended consequences and support more permanent policy decision-making.

Telemedicine from Home or the Office: Perceptions of Mental Health Providers.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rapid transition to telemedicine for mental health care and redefined many providers' work environments and practices. The purpose of the study was to investigate the impact of work location on telemental health (TMH) benefits, disruptions, and concerns to further understand the rapid implementation of telemedicine for mental health treatment. Methods: A sample of 175 practicing TMH providers completed an online survey between July and August 2020. Providers answered questions about personal demographics and practice characteristics. Next, they answered questions about benefits, disruptions, and concerns regarding the use of telemedicine in their practice. Chi-square and independent samples t-test were conducted to identify work location differences for personal demographics and clinical practice characteristics. Three multivariate analyses of covariance were conducted to examine overall differences in perceptions of telemedicine benefits, concerns, and disruptions based on work location while covarying for provider race, ethnicity, percentage of caseload seen through telemedicine, practice type, specialty, and primary method of reimbursement. Results: TMH providers who primarily work from an office reported more benefit of reduced costs/overhead (ηp2 = 0.039), less benefit of limiting the spread of the virus (ηp2 = 0.028), and more concern about reimbursement (ηp2 = 0.046) than those who primarily work from home. We observed no difference in disruptions, patient access to care, quality of care, and work-life balance. Discussion: Exploration into work location of TMH providers aids in understanding of clinical workflows and provider wellbeing. Our findings suggest that telemedicine may be easily integrated into different types of clinical workflows and work locations.

Consensus Guidelines for Teledermatology: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Consensus guidelines and recommendations play an important role in fostering quality, safety, and best practices, as they represent an expert interpretation of the biomedical literature and its application to practice. However, it is unclear whether the recent collective experience of implementing telemedicine and the concurrent growth in the evidence base for teledermatology have resulted in more robust guidance. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to describe the extent and nature of currently available guidance, defined as consensus guidelines and recommendations available for telemedicine in dermatology, with guidance defined as consensus or evidence-based guidelines, protocols, or recommendations. METHODS: We conducted a single-reviewer scoping review of the literature to assess the extent and nature of available guidance, consensus guidelines, or recommendations related to teledermatology. We limited the review to published material in English since 2013, reflecting approximately the past 10 years. We conducted the review in November and December of the year 2022. RESULTS: We identified 839 potentially eligible publications, with 9 additional records identified through organizational websites. A total of 15 publications met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The guidelines focused on varied topics and populations about dermatology and skin diseases. However, the most frequent focus was general dermatology (8/15, 53%). Approximately half of the telemedicine guidance described in the publications was specific to dermatology practice in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The publications were largely published in or after the year 2020 (13/15, 87%). Geographical origin spanned several different nations, including Australia, the United States, European countries, and India. CONCLUSIONS: We found an increase in COVID-19-specific teledermatology guidance during 2020, in addition to general teledermatology guidance during the period of the study. Primary sources of general teledermatology guidance reported in the biomedical literature are the University of Queensland's Centre for Online Health and Australasian College of Dermatologists E-Health Committee, and the American Telemedicine Association. There is strong evidence of international engagement and interest. Despite the recent increase in research reports related to telemedicine, there is a relative lack of new guidance based on COVID-19 lessons and innovations. There is a need to review recent evidence and update existing recommendations. Additionally, there is a need for guidance that addresses emerging technologies.

Therapist perspectives on telehealth-based virtual reality exposure therapy.

Virtual reality (VR) can enhance mental health care. In particular, the effectiveness of VR-based exposure therapy (VRET) has been well-demonstrated for treatment of anxiety disorders. However, most applications of VRET remain localized to clinic spaces. We aimed to explore mental health therapists' perceptions of telehealth-based VRET (tele-VRET) by conducting semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 18 telemental health therapists between October and December 2022. Interview topics included telehealth experiences, exposure therapy over telehealth, perceptions of VR in therapy, and perspectives on tele-VRET. Therapists described how telehealth reduced barriers (88.9%, 16/18), enhanced therapy (61.1%, 11/18), and improved access to clients (38.9%, 7/18), but entailed problems with technology (61.1%, 11/18), uncontrolled settings (55.6%, 10/18), and communication di culties (50%, 9/18). Therapists adapted exposure therapy to telehealth by using online resources (66.7%, 12/18), preparing client expectations (55.6%, 10/18), and adjusting workflows (27.8%, 5/18). Most therapists had used VR before (72.2%, 13/18) and had positive impressions (55.6%, 10/18), but none had used VR clinically. In response to tele-VRET, therapists requested interactive session activities (77.8%, 14/18) and customizable interventions components (55.6%, 10/18). Concerns about tele-VRET included risks with certain clients (77.8%, 14/18), costs (50%, 9/18), side effects and privacy (22.2%, 4/18), and inappropriateness for specific forms of exposure therapy (16.7%, 3/18). These results show how designing for telehealth may extend VRET and can help inform collaborative development of health technologies.

Communicating about online health information with patients: Exploring determinants among telemental health providers.

Objective: To investigate determinants of telemental health (TMH) providers' openness to discuss and confidence to use online mental health information with patients, focusing on providers' eHealth literacy and perceived usefulness of online MH information. Methods: TMH providers (N = 472) completed a web-based survey with questions about discussing and using online health information with patients, perceived usefulness of the Internet as a source of patient information, and eHealth literacy. Results: Providers were open to discussing online health information with patients if they were not treating substance abuse disorders (b = -0.83), felt the Internet was a useful resource (b = 0.18), and felt confident in their skills to evaluate the online information (b = 0.21). Providers were confident using online health information if they worked in a small clinic (b = 0.37), felt the Internet was a useful resource (b = 0.31), knew where to access relevant online health information (b = 0.13), and had skills to help their patients find (b = 0.17) and evaluate (b = 0.54) online information. Conclusion: TMH providers are likely to use online health information resources if they know where and how to find them and perceive the Internet as a useful resource. Innovation: To effectively discuss online health information with patients, providers require skills to evaluate the information with patients.

Older adults' experience with virtual conversational agents for health data collection.

Introduction: Virtual conversational agents (i.e., chatbots) are an intuitive form of data collection. Understanding older adults' experiences with chatbots could help identify their usability needs. This quality improvement study evaluated older adults' experiences with a chatbot for health data collection. A secondary goal was to understand how perceptions differed based on length of chatbot forms. Methods: After a demographic survey, participants (≥60 years) completed either a short (21 questions), moderate (30 questions), or long (66 questions) chatbot form. Perceived ease-of-use, usefulness, usability, likelihood to recommend, and cognitive load were measured post-test. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were used. Results: A total of 260 participants reported on usability and satisfaction metrics including perceived ease-of-use (5.8/7), usefulness (4.7/7), usability (5.4/7), and likelihood to recommend (Net Promoter Score = 0). Cognitive load (12.3/100) was low. There was a statistically significant difference in perceived usefulness between groups, with a significantly higher mean perceived usefulness for Group 1 than Group 3. No other group differences were observed. The chatbot was perceived as quick, easy, and pleasant with concerns about technical issues, privacy, and security. Participants provided suggestions to enhance progress tracking, edit responses, improve readability, and have options to ask questions. Discussion: Older adults found the chatbot to be easy, useful, and usable. The chatbot required low cognitive load demonstrating it could be an enjoyable health data collection tool for older adults. These results will inform the development of a health data collection chatbot technology.

Clinical and Information Services Needed by Telemental Health Providers.

Purpose: To identify clinical and informational services that telemental health (TMH) providers need to be more successful in their practice. Methods: In February-March 2021, 472 TMH providers completed a cross-sectional survey. Providers indicated the degree to which they need clinical (e.g., build therapeutic alliances) and informational (e.g., learn about regulatory changes) services. Independent samples t-tests were conducted to examine differences in needs according to when telemedicine was adopted. Results: TMH providers neutrally-to-somewhat agreed they could benefit from clinical (M = 3.24; standard deviation [SD] = 0.78) and informational (M = 3.66; SD = 0.82) services. Prepandemic TMH providers reported a greater need for services that help them cultivate relationships with patients, monitor health conditions, and to remain updated about reimbursement processes. Conclusion: All TMH providers could benefit from information about the latest trends and best practices in telemedicine. Prepandemic providers could benefit most from policy-related updates and patient-engagement services.

Providers' Perspectives on Telemental Health Usage After the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mental health care pivoted to telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, and there is uncertainty around the sustainability of this rapid shift. OBJECTIVE: This study examined how intentions to continue using telemedicine after the COVID-19 pandemic are influenced by provider perceptions of usefulness, ease of use, and professional social influence, facilitating organizational conditions. METHODS: We conducted a web-based, cross-sectional survey of 369 telemental health providers between February and March 2021. A hierarchical linear regression analysis was conducted to predict intentions to continue using telemedicine after the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Most providers began using telemedicine in March 2020 or later (257/369, 69.6%) and attended to ≥50% of their clients via telemedicine (299/369, 81.0%). Intention to continue using telemedicine after the COVID-19 pandemic was predicted by the telemedicine caseload (ß=.10; P=.005), perceived usefulness in general (ß=.10; P=.008), ease of use (ß=.08; P=.04), social influence (ß=.68; P<.001), and facilitating conditions (ß=.08; P=.047). CONCLUSIONS: Exploration of the predictors of telemedicine usage beyond the COVID-19 pandemic aids in surveillance of telemedicine usage, integration with future clinic workflows, and the shaping of public policy. It is important to consider telemedicine services as not only a response to a crisis but also an effective and useful solution for everyday life. Our results suggest widespread, sustainable telemedicine adoption.

Perceptions of Telemental Health Care Delivery During COVID-19: A Cross-Sectional Study With Providers, February-March 2021.

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated adoption of telemental health (TMH). Providers with limited TMH experience faced challenges during the rapid switch to remote patient care. We investigated TMH providers' perceptions about remote care one year into the pandemic according to when providers adopted telemedicine (i.e., before vs. after March 2020) and how much of their caseloads were served remotely (i.e., < 50% vs. ≥ 50%). Between February-March 2021, 472 TMH providers completed a cross-sectional, web-based survey that measured perceived benefits and satisfaction with telemedicine, therapeutic alliance, patient-centered communication, eHealth literacy, multicultural counseling self-efficacy, and facilitating factors of using telemedicine. Providers who began using telemedicine before the pandemic reported having better training, task-related therapeutic alliance with patients, and ability to conduct multicultural interventions, assessments, and session management. Providers who served ≥ 50% of their caseload remotely reported greater satisfaction with their practice, stronger beliefs about the benefits of telemedicine, and greater perceived effects of telemedicine on alleviating the impact of COVID-19. There were no differences in reports of patient-centered communication nor eHealth literacy. In conclusion, providers who adopted TMH more recently may require additional training and support to successfully establish a working alliance with their patients, especially with multicultural aspects of care.

The Symbiosis of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy and Telemental Health: A Review.

Phobias and related anxiety are common and costly mental health disorders. Experts anticipate the prevalence of phobias will increase due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Exposure therapies have been established as effective and reliable treatments for anxiety, including recent innovations in virtual reality-based exposure therapy (VRET). With the recent advent of telemental health (TMH), VRET is poised to become mainstream. The combination of VRET and TMH has the potential to extend provider treatment options and improve patient care experiences. In this narrative review, we describe how recent events have accelerated VRET + TMH, identify barriers to VRET + TMH implementation, and discuss strategies to navigate those barriers.

Quantifying the Impact of COVID-19 on Telemedicine Utilization: Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: While telemedicine has been expanding over the past decade, the COVID-19-related restrictions regarding in-person care have led to unprecedented levels of telemedicine utilization. To the authors' knowledge, no studies to date have quantitatively analyzed both national and regional trends in telemedicine utilization during the pandemic, both of which have key implications for informing health policy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate how trends in telemedicine utilization changed across the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using data from doxy.me, the largest free telemedicine platform, and the NIH (National Institutes of Health) Clinical Center, the largest clinical research hospital in the United States, we assessed changes in total telemedicine minutes, new provider registrations, monthly sessions, and average session length from March to November 2020. We also conducted a state-level analysis of how telemedicine expansion differed by region. RESULTS: National telemedicine utilization peaked in April 2020 at 291 million minutes and stabilized at 200 to 220 million monthly minutes from May to November 2020. Surges were strongest in New England and weakest in the South and West. Greater telemedicine expansion during the COVID-19 pandemic was geographically associated with fewer COVID-19 cases per capita. The nature of telemedicine visits also changed, as the average monthly visits per provider doubled and the average visit length decreased by 60%. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic led to an abrupt and subsequently sustained uptick in telemedicine utilization. Regional and institute-level differences in telemedicine utilization should be further investigated to inform policy and procedures for sustaining meaningful telemedicine use in clinical practice.

Exploring telemental health practice before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: This study investigated how mental health providers' use of telemedicine has changed since the coronavirus disease (COVID) 2019 pandemic and their expectations for continuing to use it once the pandemic ends. METHODS: A 15-min online survey was completed by 175 practicing and licensed telemental health providers who use telemedicine. In addition to personal and professional demographic items, the survey included items about the frequency of telemedicine use, proportion of caseload served by telemedicine, comfort using telemedicine before and during the COVID-19 pandemic, and expectations to use telemedicine after the pandemic ends. A series of χ2 analyses, an independent samples t-test, and analyses of variance were conducted. RESULTS: The pandemic resulted in a greater proportion of telemental health providers using telemedicine on a daily basis (17% before and 40% during the pandemic; p < 0.01) and serving more than half of their caseload remotely (9.1% before and 57.7% during the pandemic; p < 0.05). Also, there was a statistically significant increase in their comfort using telemedicine before and during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Providers reported expecting to use telemedicine more often after the pandemic ends (M = 3.35; SD = 0.99). Expectations to provide telemental health services after the pandemic were greater for mental health counselors, providers who practiced in rural regions, and providers who served patients through out-of-pocket payments. DISCUSSION: Telemental health providers use telemedicine daily as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, with expectations of continuing to use telemedicine in practice after the pandemic. This expectation is more prominent in certain segments of providers and warrants further investigation.

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on mental health providers in the southeastern United States.

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the need for mental health care despite novel barriers to services. Little is known about how the pandemic has affected mental health providers and their practice. In July 2020, we conducted a web-based survey of 500 licensed mental health providers to assess their employment and caseloads, logistics of care, quality of care, and patient-provider relationships and communication during the pandemic. Over 90% of providers reported changes to their employment (e.g., furloughs), with 64% no longer practicing. Providers who reported no longer practicing were older in age, racial minorities, served rural communities, worked in small clinics/provider networks, were social workers and marriage and family therapists, and relied on private insurance or out-of-pocket payment. Most practicing providers reported similar-to-increased caseloads (62%), new patients seeking services (67%), and appointment frequency (70%). Approximately 97% of providers used telemedicine, with 54% providing services mostly-to-exclusively via telemedicine. Most providers reported losing contact with patients deemed unstable (76%) or a danger to themselves/others (71%). Most providers reported maintained-to-improved quality of care (83%), patient-provider relationships (80%), and communication (80%). Results highlight concerns relating to mental health services during the pandemic, however practicing providers have demonstrated resilience to coordinate and provide high quality care.

Provision of Care by "Real World" Telemental Health Providers.

Despite its effectiveness, limited research has examined the provision of telemental health (TMH) and how practices may vary according to treatment paradigm. We surveyed 276 community mental health providers registered with a commercial telemedicine platform. Most providers reported primarily offering TMH services to adults with anxiety, depression, and trauma-and stressor-related disorders in individual therapy formats. Approximately 82% of TMH providers reported endorsing the use of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) in their remote practice. The most commonly used in-session and between-session (i.e., homework) exercises included coping and emotion regulation, problem solving, mindfulness, interpersonal skills, relaxation, and modifying and addressing core beliefs. CBT TMH providers had a higher odds of using in-session and homework exercises and assigning them through postal mail, email or fax methods, as compared to non-CBT TMH providers. TMH providers, regardless of treatment paradigm, felt that assigning homework was neither easy nor difficult and they believed their patients were somewhat-to-moderately compliant to their assigned exercises. CBT TMH providers also collected clinical information from their patients more often than non-CBT TMH providers. They reported being less satisfied with their method, which was identified most often as paper-based surveys and forms. Overall, TMH providers employ evidence-based treatments to their patients remotely, with CBT TMH providers most likely to do so. Findings highlight the need for innovative solutions to improve how TMH providers that endorse following the CBT treatment paradigm remotely assign homework and collect clinical data to increase their satisfaction via telemedicine.

Acceptability of Telemedicine Features to Promote Its Uptake in Practice: A Survey of Community Telemental Health Providers.

Understanding what motivates mental health providers to use telemedicine (i.e., telemental health) is critical for optimizing its uptake, especially during unprecedented times (e.g., the COVID-19 pandemic). Drawing from the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), this report examined the characteristics of telemental health providers and how the acceptability of telemedicine features contributes to their intention to use the technology more often in practice. Telemental health providers (N = 177) completed an online survey between March and May 2019. Most providers (75%) spent less than 25% of their work-week using telemedicine, but 70% reported an intention to use telemedicine more in the future. The belief that telemedicine affords greater access to patients, work-life balance, flexibility in providing care, and the opportunity to be at the forefront of innovative care were significant predictors of intentions to use the technology more in the future. Other significant predictors included needing assistance to coordinate insurance reimbursements, manage a successful telemedicine practice, and integrate the telemedicine program with other health IT software. Findings have important implications for increasing the frequency of telemedicine use among telemental health providers. Future research and practice should leverage providers' positive beliefs about telemedicine acceptability and consider their needs to enhance its uptake.