Personalized Telehealth: Redesigning Complex Care Delivery for the 65+ During the COVID Pandemic: a Survey of Patients, Caregivers, and Health-care Providers.

Background: In the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, rapid transitions have been made towards telehealth. Optimal use of telehealth in elderly patients remains poorly understood and adaptation challenges persist. Our study aimed at identifying perceptions, barriers, and possible facilitators to telehealth use amongst elderly patients with comorbidities, their caregivers, and health-care providers (HCPs). Methods: Health-care providers, patients 65 years and older with multiple comorbidities, and caregivers were recruited from outpatient clinics and invited to complete an electronic self-administered or telephone-administered survey on their perceptions of telehealth and of barriers to its implementation. Results: A total of 39 health-care providers, 40 patients, and 22 caregivers responded to the survey. Most patients (90%), caregivers (82%), and HCPs (97%) had experienced telephone visits, but few were conducted via videoconference platforms. Patients and caregivers showed interest in pursuing some future telehealth visits (68%, 86%, respectively), but felt they lacked access to technology and skills (n=8, 20%), and some felt that telehealth visits may be inferior to in-person visits (n=9, 23%). HCPs showed interest in incorporating telehealth visits into practice (n=32, 82%), but identified challenges in lack of administrative support (n=37), lack of HCP (n=28) and patient (n=37) technological skills, and limited infrastructure (n=37)/internet access (n=33). Conclusions: Older patients, caregivers, and HCPs show interest in pursuing future telehealth visits but elucidate similar barriers. Facilitating access to technology, as well as to administrative and technology support guides, could promote high quality and equal access to virtual care for the older adult.

Benefits of implementing a rapid access clinic in a high-volume inflammatory bowel disease center: Access, resource utilization and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Emergency situations in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) put significant burden on both the patient and the healthcare system. AIM: To prospectively measure Quality-of-Care indicators and resource utilization after the implementation of the new rapid access clinic service (RAC) at a tertiary IBD center. METHODS: Patient access, resource utilization and outcome parameters were collected from consecutive patients contacting the RAC between July 2017 and March 2019 in this observational study. For comparing resource utilization and healthcare costs, emergency department (ED) visits of IBD patients with no access to RAC services were evaluated between January 2018 and January 2019. Time to appointment, diagnostic methods, change in medical therapy, unplanned ED visits, hospitalizations and surgical admissions were calculated and compared. RESULTS: 488 patients (Crohn's disease: 68.4%/ulcerative colitis: 31.6%) contacted the RAC with a valid medical reason. Median time to visit with an IBD specialist following the index contact was 2 d. Patients had objective clinical and laboratory assessment (C-reactive protein and fecal calprotectin in 91% and 73%). Fast-track colonoscopy/sigmoidoscopy was performed in 24.6% of the patients, while computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in only 8.1%. Medical therapy was changed in 54.4%. ED visits within 30 d following the RAC visit occurred in 8.8% (unplanned ED visit rate: 5.9%). Diagnostic procedures and resource utilization at the ED (n = 135 patients) were substantially different compared to RAC users: Abdominal computed tomography was more frequent (65.7%, P < 0.001), coupled with multiple specialist consults, more frequent hospital admission (P < 0.001), higher steroid initiation (P < 0.001). Average medical cost estimates of diagnostic procedures and services per patient was $403 CAD vs $1885 CAD comparing all RAC and ED visits. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a RAC improved patient care by facilitating easier access to IBD specific medical care, optimized resource utilization and helped avoiding ED visits and subsequent hospitalizations.

Harmonization of quality of care in an IBD center impacts disease outcomes: Importance of structure, process indicators and rapid access clinic.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the quality of care at a tertiary inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) center using quality of care indicators (QIs) including patient assessment strategy, monitoring, treatment decisions and outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the quality of care pre- and post-referral and during follow-up at the at the McGill University Health Center (MUHC) IBD center. Consecutive patients were included presenting with an outpatient visit ('index visit') between July and December 2016. Disease characteristics, biochemistry, imaging and endoscopy data, changes in medications, and vaccination profiles were captured. RESULTS: 1357 patients were included. At referral, a large proportion of patients were objectively re-evaluated (ileocolonoscopy: 79%, cross-sectional imaging: 39.3%, biomarkers: 89.9%, 81.9%). Therapeutic strategy was changed in 53.6% with 22.5% of patients starting biologics. Tight objective patient monitoring was applied during follow-up (colonoscopy: 79%, cross-sectional imaging: 61.8% were available at index visit; C-reactive protein: 78%, Faecal calprotectin: 37.6%, therapeutic drug monitoring: 16.3% were performed additionally). Maximum therapeutic step was biologicals in 48.8% of the patients, while only 6.6% of all patients were steroid dependent. Implementation of a rapid access clinic improved healthcare delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support that tight monitoring was applied at the MUHC IBD center with a high emphasis on objective patient (re)evaluation, timely access and accelerated treatment strategy at referral and during follow-up.