Search

Synchronous home-based telemedicine for primary care experienced growth during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. A review was conducted on the evidence reporting on the feasibility of synchronous telemedicine implementation within primary care, barriers and facilitators to implementation and use, patient characteristics associated with use or nonuse, and quality and cost/revenue-related outcomes. Initial database searches yielded 1,527 articles, of which 22 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Synchronous telemedicine was considered appropriate for visits not requiring a physical examination. Benefits included decreased travel and wait times, and improved access to care. For certain services, visit quality was comparable to in-person care, and patient and provider satisfaction was high. Facilitators included proper technology, training, and reimbursement policies that created payment parity between telemedicine and in-person care. Barriers included technological issues, such as low technical literacy and poor internet connectivity among certain patient populations, and communication barriers for patients requiring translators or additional resources to communicate.

Early in the pandemic, New York City's public hospital system partnered with multiple philanthropic foundations to offer an unconditional cash transfer program for low-income New Yorkers affected by COVID-19. The $1000 cash transfers were designed to help people meet their most immediate health and social needs and were incorporated into healthcare delivery and contact tracing workflows as a response to the public health emergency. To better understand program recipients' experiences, researchers conducted 150 telephone surveys with randomly sampled cash transfer recipients and 20 in-depth qualitative interviews with purposefully sampled survey participants. Survey participants were predominantly Latinx (87%) and women (65%). The most common reported uses of the $1000 were food and rent. Most participants (79%) reported that without the $1000 cash transfer they would have had difficulty paying for basic expenses or making ends meet, with specific positive effects reported related to food, housing, and ability to work. The majority of survey participants reported that receiving the cash assistance somewhat or greatly improved their physical health (83%) and mental health (89%). Qualitative interview results generally supported the survey findings., (© 2022. The New York Academy of Medicine.)

Background: Studies specifically focused on patients' perspectives on telemedicine visits in primary and behavioral health care are fairly limited and have often focused on highly selected populations or used overall satisfaction surveys., Objective: To examine patient perspectives on the shift to telemedicine, the remote delivery of health care via the use of electronic information and communications technology, in primary and behavioral health care in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) during COVID-19., Design: Semi-structured interviews were conducted using video conference with patients and caregivers between October and December 2020., Participants: Providers from 6 FQHCs nominated participants. Eighteen patients and caregivers were interviewed: 6 patients with only primary care visits; 5 with only behavioral health visits; 3 with both primary care and behavioral health visits; and 4 caregivers of children with pediatric visits., Approach: Using a protocol-driven, rapid qualitative methodology, we analyzed the interview data and assessed the quality of care, benefits and challenges of telemedicine, and use of telemedicine post-pandemic., Key Results: Respondents broadly supported the option of home-based synchronous telemedicine visits in primary and behavioral health care. Nearly all respondents appreciated remote visits, largely because such visits provided a safe option during the pandemic. Patients were generally satisfied with telemedicine and believed the quality of visits to be similar to in-person visits, especially when delivered by a provider with whom they had established rapport. Although most respondents planned to return to mostly in-person visits when considered safe to do so, they remained supportive of the continued option for remote visits as remote care addresses some of the typical barriers faced by low-income patients., Conclusions: Addressing digital literacy challenges, enhancing remote visit privacy, and improving practice workflows will help ensure equitable access to all patients as we move to a new post-COVID-19 "normal" marked by increased reliance on telemedicine and technology., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Background: Primary care practices have remained on the frontline of health care service delivery throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of our study was to understand the early pandemic experience of primary care practices, how they adapted care processes for chronic disease management and preventive care, and the future potential of these practices' service delivery adaptations., Methods: We interviewed 44 providers and staff at 22 high-performing primary care practices located throughout the United States between March and May 2020. Interviews were transcribed and coded using a modified rapid assessment process due to the time-sensitive nature of the study., Results: Practices reported employing a variety of adaptations to care during the COVID-19 pandemic including maintaining safe and socially distanced access through increased use of telehealth visits, using disease registries to identify and proactively outreach to patients, providing remote patient education, and incorporating more home-based monitoring into care. Routine screening and testing slowed considerably, resulting in concerns about delayed detection. Patients with fewer resources, lower health literacy, and older adults were the most difficult to reach and manage during this time., Conclusion: Our findings indicate that primary care structures and processes developed for remote chronic disease management and preventive care are evolving rapidly. Emerging adapted care processes, most notably remote provision of care, are promising and may endure beyond the pandemic, but issues of equity must be addressed (e.g., through payment reform) to ensure vulnerable populations receive the same benefit., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objective: To review the frequency as well as the pros and cons of telephone and video-enabled telemedicine during the first 9 months of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic as experienced by safety net providers across New York State (NYS)., Methods: Analysis of visits to 36 community health centers (CHCs) in NYS by modality (telephone vs video) from February to November 2020. Semi-structured interviews with 25 primary care, behavioral health, and pediatric providers from 8 CHCs., Findings: In the week following the NYS stay-at-home order, video and telephone visits rose from 3.4 and 0% of total visits to 14.9 and 22.3%. At its peak, more than 60% of visits were conducted via telemedicine (April 2020) before tapering off to about 30% of visits (August 2020). Providers expressed a strong preference for video visits, particularly for situations when visual assessments were needed. Yet, more visits were conducted over telephone than video at all points throughout the pandemic. Video-specific advantages included enhanced ability to engage patients and use of visual cues to get a comprehensive look into the patient's life, including social supports, hygiene, and medication adherence. Telephone presented unique benefits, including greater privacy, feasibility, and ease of use that make it critical to engage with key populations and as a backup for when video was not an option., Conclusions: Despite challenges, providers reported positive experiences delivering care remotely using both telephone and video during the COVID-19 pandemic and believe both modalities are critical for enabling access to care in the safety net., Competing Interests: Conflict of interests: None., (© Copyright 2021 by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Background: New York City (NYC) was the first COVID-19 epicenter in the United States and home to one of the country's largest contact tracing programs, NYC Test & Trace (T2). Understanding points of attrition along the stages of program implementation and follow-up can inform contact tracing efforts for future epidemics or pandemics. The objective of this study was to evaluate the completeness and timeliness of T2 case and contact notification and monitoring using a "cascade of care" approach. Methods: This cross-sectional study included all SARS-CoV-2 cases and contacts reported to T2 from May 31, 2020 to January 1, 2022. Attrition along the "cascade of care" was defined as: (1) attempted, (2) reached, (3) completed intake (main outcome), (4) eligible for monitoring, and (5) successfully monitored. Timeliness was assessed: (1) by median days from a case's date of testing until their positive result was reported to T2, (2) from result until the case was notified by T2, and (3) from a case report of a contact until notification of the contact. Results: A total of 1.45 million cases and 1.38 million contacts were reported to T2 during this period. For cases, attrition occurred evenly across the first three cascade steps (~-12%) and did not change substantially until the Omicron wave in December 2021. During the Omicron wave, the proportion of cases attempted dropped precipitously. For contacts, the largest attrition occurred between attempting and reaching (-27%), and attrition rose with each COVID-19 wave as contact volumes increased. Attempts to reach contacts discontinued entirely during the Omicron wave. Overall, 67% of cases and 49% of contacts completed intake interviews (79% and 57% prior to Omicron). T2 was timely, with a median of 1 day to receive lab results, 2 days to notify cases, and < 1 day to notify contacts. Conclusions: T2 provided a large volume of NYC residents with timely notification and monitoring. Engagement in the program was lower for contacts than cases, with the largest gap coming from inability to reach individuals during call attempts. To strengthen future test-and-trace efforts, strategies are needed to encourage acceptance of local contact tracer outreach attempts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Studies specifically focused on patients' perspectives on telemedicine visits in primary and behavioral health care are fairly limited and have often focused on highly selected populations or used overall satisfaction surveys. Objective: To examine patient perspectives on the shift to telemedicine, the remote delivery of health care via the use of electronic information and communications technology, in primary and behavioral health care in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) during COVID-19. Design: Semi-structured interviews were conducted using video conference with patients and caregivers between October and December 2020. Participants: Providers from 6 FQHCs nominated participants. Eighteen patients and caregivers were interviewed: 6 patients with only primary care visits; 5 with only behavioral health visits; 3 with both primary care and behavioral health visits; and 4 caregivers of children with pediatric visits. Approach: Using a protocol-driven, rapid qualitative methodology, we analyzed the interview data and assessed the quality of care, benefits and challenges of telemedicine, and use of telemedicine post-pandemic. Key Results: Respondents broadly supported the option of home-based synchronous telemedicine visits in primary and behavioral health care. Nearly all respondents appreciated remote visits, largely because such visits provided a safe option during the pandemic. Patients were generally satisfied with telemedicine and believed the quality of visits to be similar to in-person visits, especially when delivered by a provider with whom they had established rapport. Although most respondents planned to return to mostly in-person visits when considered safe to do so, they remained supportive of the continued option for remote visits as remote care addresses some of the typical barriers faced by low-income patients. Conclusions: Addressing digital literacy challenges, enhancing remote visit privacy, and improving practice workflows will help ensure equitable access to all patients as we move to a new post-COVID-19 "normal" marked by increased reliance on telemedicine and technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]