McGinley Marisa Patryce, Harvey Tucker, Ontaneda Daniel, Weathers Allison L, Cobb Bryan R, Patel Anisha
Cleveland Clinic (MPM, DO, ALW); Department of Quantitative Health Sciences (TH), Cleveland Clinic, OH; and Genentech Inc., (BRC, AP), South San Francisco, CA.
Neurol Clin Pract. 2025 Feb;15(1):e200407. doi: 10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200407. Epub 2024 Nov 20.
To characterize outpatient telemedicine utilization for neurologic conditions and identify potential disparities.
All outpatient visits conducted by neurology clinicians at an academic medical health care system for patients aged 18 years or older from January 2019 to July 2022 were included. All telemedicine visits were synchronous audio-visual. Patients completing in-person visits alone were compared with patients completing telemedicine visits. Utilization of telemedicine was compared across 3 time frames: prepandemic (before March 2020), early-pandemic (March-June 2020), and late-pandemic (July 2020-July 2022). Generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to evaluate whether the odds of a visit being telemedicine vs in-person differed based on the time frame and to predict likelihood of telemedicine vs in-person visit in late pandemic time frame.
In total, 242,273 patients (mean age 55.9 years, 58.2% female, 81.9% White, 12.5% Black, 3.4% Hispanic, 39.2% Medicare) completed 752,174 visits during the study time frame. There was a significant difference in telemedicine utilization between the time frames, with the highest utilization being in the early pandemic ( 0.01). In the late pandemic time frame, odds of a telemedicine visit were significantly lower for individuals who were older (odds ratio [OR] 0.97), Black (OR 0.84), Hispanic (OR 0.70), a higher Area Deprivation Index (20%-40%: OR 0.85, 40%-60%: OR 0.80, 60%-80%: OR 0.78, ≥80%: OR 0.65), with nonprivate insurance (Medicaid OR 0.78; Medicare OR 0.84; self-pay OR 0.60), and non-English preferred language (OR 0.61) ( < 0.01 for all). Odds of a telemedicine visit were significantly higher for individuals who were female (OR 1.25) and lived outside of the greater Cleveland area (other Ohio OR 2.33; out of state OR 3.32) ( < 0.01). Visits completed by rural patients did not differ significantly from metropolitan patients (OR 0.95, = 0.09).
Disparities in telemedicine persist with lower use in individuals who were older, Black, Hispanic, non-English preferred language, and lower socioeconomic status. These disparities improved initially but were accentuated later in the pandemic. The equal utilization of telemedicine by rural and urban patients in this study suggests the potential of telemedicine to improve access disparities for rural patients. The implementation of equitable health care delivery will require a better understanding of barriers, preferences, and legislation needed to support equitable telemedicine access.
描述神经系统疾病门诊远程医疗的使用情况,并识别潜在的差异。
纳入2019年1月至2022年7月期间,某学术医疗保健系统中神经科临床医生为18岁及以上患者进行的所有门诊就诊。所有远程医疗就诊均为同步视听就诊。将仅完成面对面就诊的患者与完成远程医疗就诊的患者进行比较。在三个时间段内比较远程医疗的使用情况:疫情前(2020年3月之前)、疫情早期(2020年3月至6月)和疫情后期(2020年7月至2022年7月)。使用广义线性混合效应模型来评估就诊为远程医疗而非面对面就诊的几率是否因时间段而异,并预测疫情后期时间段内远程医疗与面对面就诊的可能性。
在研究时间段内,共有242,273名患者(平均年龄55.9岁,58.2%为女性,81.9%为白人,12.5%为黑人,3.4%为西班牙裔,39.2%为医疗保险患者)完成了752,174次就诊。各时间段之间远程医疗使用情况存在显著差异,疫情早期使用率最高(0.01)。在疫情后期时间段内,年龄较大者(优势比[OR] 0.97)、黑人(OR 0.84)、西班牙裔(OR 0.70)、地区贫困指数较高者(20% - 40%:OR 0.85,40% - 60%:OR 0.80,60% - 80%:OR 0.78,≥80%:OR 0.65)、拥有非私人保险者(医疗补助OR 0.78;医疗保险OR 0.84;自费OR 0.60)以及偏好非英语者(OR 0.61)进行远程医疗就诊的几率显著较低(所有P < 0.01)。女性(OR 1.25)以及居住在大克利夫兰地区以外者(俄亥俄州其他地区OR 2.33;州外OR 3.32)进行远程医疗就诊的几率显著较高(P < 0.01)。农村患者完成的就诊与城市患者相比无显著差异(OR 0.95,P = 0.09)。
远程医疗存在差异,年龄较大、黑人、西班牙裔、偏好非英语以及社会经济地位较低的个体使用较少。这些差异在疫情初期有所改善,但在疫情后期加剧。本研究中农村和城市患者对远程医疗的平等使用表明远程医疗有潜力改善农村患者的就医差异。实施公平的医疗服务将需要更好地理解支持公平远程医疗接入所需的障碍、偏好和立法。