The Impact Of Telemedicine On Medicare Utilization, Spending, And Quality, 2019-22.

Telemedicine use remains substantially higher than it was before the COVID-19 pandemic, although it has fallen from pandemic highs. To inform the ongoing debate about whether to continue payment for telemedicine visits, we estimated the association of greater telemedicine use across health systems with utilization, spending, and quality. In 2020, Medicare patients receiving care at health systems in the highest quartile of telemedicine use had 2.5 telemedicine visits per person (26.8 percent of visits) compared with 0.7 telemedicine visits per person (9.5 percent of visits) in the lowest quartile of telemedicine use. In 2021-22, relative to those in the lowest quartile, Medicare patients of health systems in the highest quartile had an increase of 0.21 total outpatient visits (telemedicine and in-person) per patient per year (2.2 percent relative increase), a decrease of 14.4 annual non-COVID-19 emergency department visits per 1,000 patients per year (2.7 percent relative decrease), a $248 increase in per patient per year spending (1.6 percent relative increase), and increased adherence for metformin and statins. There were no clear differential changes in hospitalizations or receipt of preventive care.

In-Person Visits Before Initiation of Telemedicine for Mental Illness.

This cross-sectional study examines how often patients had an in-person visit before initiating telemedicine for mental illness between 2019 and 2022.

Challenges and Facilitators in Implementing Remote Patient Monitoring Programs in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in greater use of remote patient monitoring (RPM). However, the use of RPM has been modest compared to other forms of telehealth. OBJECTIVE: To identify and describe barriers to the implementation of RPM among primary care physicians (PCPs) that may be constraining its growth. DESIGN: We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with PCPs across the USA who adopted RPM. Interview questions focused on implementation facilitators and barriers and RPM's impact on quality. We conducted thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews using both inductive and deductive approaches. The analysis was informed by the NASSS (non-adoption and abandonment and challenges to scale-up, spread, and sustainability) framework. PARTICIPANTS: PCPs who practiced at least 10 h per week in an outpatient setting, served adults, and monitored blood pressure and/or blood glucose levels with automatic transmission of data with at least 3 patients. KEY RESULTS: While PCPs generally agreed that RPM improved quality of care for their patients, many identified barriers to adoption and maintenance of RPM programs. Challenges included difficulties handling the influx of data and establishing a manageable workflow, along with digital and health literacy barriers. In addition to these barriers, many PCPs did not believe RPM was profitable. CONCLUSIONS: To encourage ongoing growth of RPM, it will be necessary to address implementation barriers through changes in payment policy, training and education in digital and health literacy, improvements in staff roles and workflows, and new strategies to ensure equitable access.

Drivers of Geographic Patterns in Outpatient Antibiotic Prescribing in the United States.

In a retrospective, ecological analysis of US medical claims, visit rates explained more of the geographic variation in outpatient antibiotic prescribing rates than per-visit prescribing. Efforts to reduce antibiotic use may benefit from addressing the factors that drive higher rates of outpatient visits, in addition to continued focus on stewardship.

Antibiotic Receipt for Pediatric Telemedicine Visits With Primary Care vs Direct-to-Consumer Vendors.

Importance: Prior research found that pediatric direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine visits are associated with more antibiotic prescribing than in-person primary care visits. It is unclear whether this difference is associated with modality of care (telemedicine vs in-person) or with the context of telemedicine care (primary care vs not primary care). Objective: To compare antibiotic management during telemedicine visits with primary care practitioners (PCPs) vs commercial direct-to-consumer (DTC) telemedicine companies for pediatric acute respiratory tract infections (ARTIs). Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional study of visits for ARTIs by commercially insured children 17 years of age or younger analyzed deidentified medical and pharmacy claims in OptumLabs Data Warehouse data, a national sample of commercial enrollees, between January 1 and December 31, 2022. Exposure: Setting of telemedicine visit as PCP vs DTC. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was percentage of visits with antibiotic receipt. Secondary outcomes were the percentages of visits with diagnoses for which prescription of an antibiotic was potentially appropriate, guideline-concordant antibiotic management, and follow-up ARTI visits within the ensuing 1 to 2 days and 3 to 14 days. The ARTI telemedicine visits with PCP vs DTC telemedicine companies were matched on child demographic characteristics. Generalized estimated equation log-binomial regression models were used to compute marginal outcomes. Results: In total, data from 27 686 children (mean [SD] age, 8.9 [5.0] years; 13 893 [50.2%] male) were included in this study. There were 14 202 PCP telemedicine index visits matched to 14 627 DTC telemedicine index visits. The percentage of visits involving receipt of an antibiotic was lower for PCP (28.9% [95% CI, 28.1%-29.7%]) than for DTC (37.2% [95% CI, 36.0%-38.5%]) telemedicine visits. Additionally, fewer PCP telemedicine visits involved receipt of a diagnosis in which the use of antibiotics may be appropriate (19.0% [95% CI, 18.4%-19.7%] vs 28.4% [95% CI, 27.3%-29.6%]), but no differences were observed in receipt of nonguideline-concordant antibiotic management based on a given diagnosis between PCP (20.2% [95% CI, 19.5%-20.9%]) and DTC (20.1% [95% CI, 19.1%-21.0%]) telemedicine visits. Fewer PCP telemedicine visits involved a follow-up visit within the ensuing 1 to 2 days (5.0% [95% CI, 4.7%-5.4%] vs 8.0% [95% CI, 7.3%-8.7%]) and 3 to 14 days (8.2% [95% CI, 7.8%-8.7%] vs 9.6% [95% CI, 8.8%-10.3%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with virtual-only DTC telemedicine companies, telemedicine integrated within primary care was associated with lower rates of antibiotic receipt and follow-up care. Supporting use of telemedicine integrated within pediatric primary care may be one strategy to reduce antibiotic receipt through telemedicine visits.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Telemedicine Use.

Importance: Individuals of racial and ethnic minority groups may be less likely to use telemedicine in part due to lack of access to technology (ie, digital divide). To date, some studies have found less telemedicine use by individuals of racial and ethnic minority groups compared with White individuals, and others have found the opposite. What explains these different findings is unclear. Objective: To quantify racial and ethnic differences in the receipt of telemedicine and total visits with and without accounting for demographic and clinical characteristics and geography. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included individuals who were continuously enrolled in traditional Medicare from March 2020 to February 2022 or until death. Exposure: Race and ethnicity, which was categorized as Black non-Hispanic, Hispanic, White non-Hispanic, other (defined as American Indian/Pacific Islander, Alaska Native, and Asian), and unknown/missing. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total telemedicine visits (audio-video or audio); total visits (telemedicine or in-person) per individual during the study period. Multivariable models were used that sequentially adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics and geographic area to examine their association with differences in telemedicine and total visit utilization by documented race and ethnicity. Results: In this national sample of 14 305 819 individuals, 7.4% reported that they were Black, 5.6% Hispanic, and 4.2% other race. In unadjusted results, compared with White individuals, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups had 16.7 (95% CI, 16.1-17.3), 32.9 (95% CI, 32.3-33.6), and 20.9 (95% CI, 20.2-21.7) more telemedicine visits per 100 beneficiaries, respectively. After adjustment for clinical and demographic characteristics and geography, compared with White individuals, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups had 7.9 (95% CI, -8.5 to -7.3), 13.2 (95% CI, -13.9 to -12.6), and 9.2 (95% CI, -10.0 to -8.5) fewer telemedicine visits per 100 beneficiaries, respectively. In unadjusted and fully adjusted models, and in 2019 and the second year of the COVID-19 pandemic, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups continued to have fewer total visits than White individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cross-sectional study of US Medicare enrollees suggest that although nationally, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups received more telemedicine visits during the pandemic and disproportionately lived in geographic regions with higher telemedicine use, after controlling for geographic region, Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals of other racial groups received fewer telemedicine visits than White individuals.

Trends in Use of Telemedicine for Stimulant Initiation Among Children and Adults.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to examine trends in stimulant initiation and follow-up care for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) via telemedicine. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal study used national, deidentified commercial health insurance outpatient claims among children (ages 2-17 years; N=535,629) and adults (ages 18-64 years; N=2,116,160) from January 2019 through April 2022. Regression analyses were used to examine risk for stimulant initiation, whether initiation occurred via telemedicine or in-person care, and receipt of a follow-up visit. RESULTS: The mean monthly adjusted number of stimulant initiations per 100,000 enrollees was similar for children before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (prepandemic, 57 initiations; during pandemic, 56 initiations) but increased for adults (prepandemic, 27 initiations; during pandemic, 33 initiations). Initiations via telemedicine peaked at 53%-57% in April 2020 and dropped to about 14% among children and 28% among adults in April 2022. Telemedicine initiations were significantly more common among psychiatrists than among other prescribers (OR=3.70, 95% CI=3.38-4.06 [children]; OR=3.02, 95% CI=2.87-3.17 [adults]) and less common for rural residents (OR=0.57, 95% CI=0.40-0.82 [children]; OR=0.75, 95% CI=0.61-0.92 [adults]). Follow-up care was significantly more common among individuals whose care was initiated via telemedicine than among those receiving in-person care (OR=1.09, 95% CI=1.00-1.19 [children]; OR=1.61, 95% CI=1.53-1.69 [adults]). CONCLUSIONS: Many stimulant treatments were initiated via telemedicine. Proposed rules to prohibit controlled substance prescribing without an in-person evaluation would require significant changes in current practice, potentially limiting access to stimulant medications for ADHD.

National Trends in Billing Secure Messages as E-Visits.

This study assesses US trends in e-visit billing using national all-payer claims.

Health Care Contact Days Among Older Adults in Traditional Medicare : A Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Days spent obtaining health care outside the home can represent not only access to needed care but also substantial time, effort, and cost, especially for older adults and their care partners. Yet, these "health care contact days" have not been characterized. OBJECTIVE: To assess composition of, variation and patterns in, and factors associated with contact days among older adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Nationally representative 2019 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data linked to claims. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling adults aged 65 years and older in traditional Medicare. MEASUREMENTS: Ambulatory contact days (days with a primary care or specialty care office visit, test, imaging, procedure, or treatment) and total contact days (ambulatory days plus institutional days in a hospital, emergency department, skilled-nursing facility, or hospice facility); multivariable mixed-effects Poisson regression to identify patient factors associated with contact days. RESULTS: In weighted results, 6619 older adults (weighted: 29 694 084) had means of 17.3 ambulatory contact days (SD, 22.1) and 20.7 total contact days (SD, 27.5) in the year; 11.1% had 50 or more total contact days. Older adults spent most contact days on ambulatory care, including primary care visits (mean [SD], 3.5 [5.0]), specialty care visits (5.7 [9.6]), tests (5.3 [7.2]), imaging (2.6 [3.9]), procedures (2.5 [6.4]), and treatments (5.7 [13.3]). Half of the test and imaging days were not on the same days as office visits (48.6% and 50.1%, respectively). Factors associated with more ambulatory contact days included younger age, female sex, White race, non-Hispanic ethnicity, higher income, higher educational attainment, urban residence, more chronic conditions, and care-seeking behaviors (for example, "go to the doctor…as soon as (I)…feel bad"). LIMITATION: Study population limited to those in traditional Medicare. CONCLUSION: On average, older adults spent 3 weeks in the year getting care outside the home. These contact days were mostly ambulatory and varied widely not only by number of chronic conditions but also by sociodemographic factors, geography, and care-seeking behaviors. These results show factors beyond clinical need that may drive overuse and underuse of contact days and opportunities to optimize this person-centered measure to reduce patient burdens, for example, via care coordination. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Clinical Risk and Outpatient Therapy Utilization for COVID-19 in the Medicare Population.

Importance: Multiple therapies are available for outpatient treatment of COVID-19 that are highly effective at preventing hospitalization and mortality. Although racial and socioeconomic disparities in use of these therapies have been documented, limited evidence exists on what factors explain differences in use and the potential public health relevance of these differences. Objective: To assess COVID-19 outpatient treatment utilization in the Medicare population and simulate the potential outcome of allocating treatment according to patient risk for severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included patients enrolled in Medicare in 2022 across the US, identified with 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was any COVID-19 outpatient therapy utilization. Secondary outcomes included COVID-19 testing, ambulatory visits, and hospitalization. Differences in outcomes were estimated based on patient demographics, treatment contraindications, and a composite risk score for mortality after COVID-19 based on demographics and comorbidities. A simulation of reallocating COVID-19 treatment, particularly with nirmatrelvir, to those at high risk of severe disease was performed, and the potential COVID-19 hospitalizations and mortality outcomes were assessed. Results: In 2022, 6.0% of 20 026 910 beneficiaries received outpatient COVID-19 treatment, 40.5% of which had no associated COVID-19 diagnosis within 10 days. Patients with higher risk for severe disease received less outpatient treatment, such as 6.4% of those aged 65 to 69 years compared with 4.9% of those 90 years and older (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.62-0.65]) and 6.4% of White patients compared with 3.0% of Black patients (aOR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.54-0.58]). In the highest COVID-19 severity risk quintile, 2.6% were hospitalized for COVID-19 and 4.9% received outpatient treatment, compared with 0.2% and 7.5% in the lowest quintile. These patterns were similar among patients with a documented COVID-19 diagnosis, those with no claims for vaccination, and patients who are insured with Medicare Advantage. Differences were not explained by variable COVID-19 testing, ambulatory visits, or treatment contraindications. Reallocation of 2022 outpatient COVID-19 treatment, particularly with nirmatrelvir, based on risk for severe COVID-19 would have averted 16 503 COVID-19 deaths (16.3%) in the sample. Conclusion: In this cross-sectional study, outpatient COVID-19 treatment was disproportionately accessed by beneficiaries at lower risk for severe infection, undermining its potential public health benefit. Undertreatment was not driven by lack of clinical access or treatment contraindications.

Characteristics of Mental Health Specialists Who Shifted Their Practice Entirely to Telemedicine.

This cohort study investigates the number and characteristics of US mental health specialists who had shifted to a fully virtual practice as of 2022.

Increasing Telehealth Access Through Licensure Exceptions.

This Viewpoint explains how exceptions can be used to connect patients via telehealth with a physician in another state, why this is a more practical and effective strategy, and what needs to happen for this to be a feasible solution.

Differences by Physician Seniority in Race and Ethnicity and Insurance Coverage of Treated Patients.

This cross-sectional study investigates the share of patients who were members of racial and ethnic minority groups or Medicaid enrollees by physician seniority.

Effects of Remote Patient Monitoring Use on Care Outcomes Among Medicare Patients With Hypertension : An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is a promising tool for improving chronic disease management. Use of RPM for hypertension monitoring is growing rapidly, raising concerns about increased spending. However, the effects of RPM are still unclear. OBJECTIVE: To estimate RPM's effect on hypertension care and spending. DESIGN: Matched observational study emulating a longitudinal, cluster randomized trial. After matching, effect estimates were derived from a regression analysis comparing changes in outcomes from 2019 to 2021 for patients with hypertension at high-RPM practices versus those at matched control practices with little RPM use. SETTING: Traditional Medicare. PATIENTS: Patients with hypertension. INTERVENTION: Receipt of care at a high-RPM practice. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcomes included hypertension medication use (medication fills, adherence, and unique medications received), outpatient visit use, testing and imaging use, hypertension-related acute care use, and total hypertension-related spending. RESULTS: 192 high-RPM practices (with 19 978 patients with hypertension) were matched to 942 low-RPM control practices (with 95 029 patients with hypertension). Compared with patients with hypertension at matched low-RPM practices, patients with hypertension at high-RPM practices had a 3.3% (95% CI, 1.9% to 4.8%) relative increase in hypertension medication fills, a 1.6% (CI, 0.7% to 2.5%) increase in days' supply, and a 1.3% (CI, 0.2% to 2.4%) increase in unique medications received. Patients at high-RPM practices also had fewer hypertension-related acute care encounters (-9.3% [CI, -20.6% to 2.1%]) and reduced testing use (-5.9% [CI, -11.9% to 0.0%]). However, these patients also saw increases in primary care physician outpatient visits (7.2% [CI, -0.1% to 14.6%]) and a $274 [CI, $165 to $384]) increase in total hypertension-related spending. LIMITATION: Lacked blood pressure data; residual confounding. CONCLUSION: Patients in high-RPM practices had improved hypertension care outcomes but increased spending. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.

Expiration of State Licensure Waivers and Out-of-State Telemedicine Relationships.

This cross-sectional study compares the use of telemedicine in states where COVID-19 pandemic­related licensure waivers expired vs states where waivers continued.

Use of Telemedicine and Quality of Care Among Medicare Enrollees With Serious Mental Illness.

Importance: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a large fraction of mental health care was provided via telemedicine. The implications of this shift in care for use of mental health service and quality of care have not been characterized. Objective: To compare changes in care patterns and quality during the first year of the pandemic among Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness (schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder) cared for at practices with higher vs lower telemedicine use. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder were attributed to specialty mental health practices that delivered the majority of their mental health care in 2019. Practices were categorized into 3 groups based on the proportion of telemental health visits provided during the first year of the pandemic (March 2020-February 2021): lowest use (0%-49%), middle use (50%-89%), or highest use (90%-100%). Across the 3 groups of practices, differential changes in patient outcomes were calculated from the year before the pandemic started to the year after. These changes were also compared with differential changes from a 2-year prepandemic period. Analyses were conducted in November 2022. Exposure: Practice-level use of telemedicine during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the total number of mental health visits (telemedicine plus in-person) per person. Secondary outcomes included the number of acute hospital and emergency department encounters, all-cause mortality, and quality outcomes, including adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications (as measured by the number of months of medication fills) and 7- and 30-day outpatient follow-up rates after discharge for a mental health hospitalization. Results: The pandemic cohort included 120 050 Medicare beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 56.5 [14.5] years; 66 638 females [55.5%]) with serious mental illness. Compared with prepandemic changes and relative to patients receiving care at practices with the lowest telemedicine use: patients receiving care at practices in the middle and highest telemedicine use groups had 1.11 (95% CI, 0.45-1.76) and 1.94 (95% CI, 1.28-2.59) more mental health visits per patient per year (or 7.5% [95% CI, 3.0%-11.9%] and 13.0% [95% CI, 8.6%-17.4%] more mental health visits per year, respectively). Among patients of practices with middle and highest telemedicine use, changes in adherence to antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing medications were -0.4% (95% CI, -1.3% to 0.5%) and -0.1% (95% CI, -1.0% to 0.8%), and hospital and emergency department use for any reason changed by 2.4% (95% CI, -1.5% to 6.2%) and 2.8% (95% CI, -1.2% to 6.8%), respectively. There were no significant differential changes in postdischarge follow-up or mortality rates according to the level of telemedicine use. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries with serious mental illness, patients receiving care from practices that had a higher level of telemedicine use during the COVID-19 pandemic had more mental health visits per year compared with prepandemic levels, with no differential changes in other observed quality metrics over the same period.

Choosing Or Losing In Behavioral Health: A Study Of Patients' Experiences Selecting Telehealth Versus In-Person Care.

It is not known how the growth of telehealth has affected patients' choice of visit modalities (telehealth versus in person). In 2023 we conducted a mixed-methods study that paired a nationally representative survey of 2,071 adults (including 571 who used behavioral health services) and semistructured interviews with twenty-six people with depression or bipolar disorder. We explored patients' experiences with visit modality selection and their agency in the decision. Approximately one-third of patients receiving therapy or medication visits reported that their clinicians did not offer both modalities. Thirty-two percent reported that they did not typically receive their preferred modality, and 45 percent did not believe that their clinician considered their modality preferences. Qualitative findings revealed that some clinicians did not elicit patients' modality preferences. Perceived lack of choice affected satisfaction and rapport with clinicians and encouraged some people to seek care elsewhere. These findings highlight trade-offs in policies to preserve patient choice and approaches that clinicians can take to identify and accommodate patients' preferences.

Provision of evaluation and management visits by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the USA from 2013 to 2019: cross-sectional time series study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the proportion of healthcare visits are delivered by nurse practitioners and physician assistants versus physicians and how this has changed over time and by clinical setting, diagnosis, and patient demographics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional time series study. SETTING: National data from the traditional Medicare insurance program in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Of people using Medicare (ie, those older than 65 years, permanently disabled, and people with end stage renal disease), a 20% random sample was taken. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of physician, nurse practitioner, and physician assistant visits in the outpatient and skilled nursing facility settings delivered by physicians, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants, and how this proportion varies by type of visit and diagnosis. RESULTS: From 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2019, 276 million visits were included in the sample. The proportion of all visits delivered by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in a year increased from 14.0% (95% confidence interval 14.0% to 14.0%) to 25.6% (25.6% to 25.6%). In 2019, the proportion of visits delivered by a nurse practitioner or physician assistant varied across conditions, ranging from 13.2% for eye disorders and 20.4% for hypertension to 36.7% for anxiety disorders and 41.5% for respiratory infections. Among all patients with at least one visit in 2019, 41.9% had one or more nurse practitioner or physician assistant visits. Compared with patients who had no visits from a nurse practitioner or physician assistant, the likelihood of receiving any care was greatest among patients who were lower income (2.9% greater), rural residents (19.7%), and disabled (5.6%). CONCLUSION: The proportion of visits delivered by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the USA is increasing rapidly and now accounts for a quarter of all healthcare visits.

Changing Health Care Markets Have the Potential to Undermine Stroke Systems of Care.

This Viewpoint discusses the importance of prioritizing quality of care for patients with stroke in a changing health care environment.