Search

Background: Since the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic on 11 March 2020, health technologies have been rapidly scaled up to ensure access to care. A significant innovation has been telehealth in general practice. Now widespread, it remains unknown how this shift to virtual care has impacted on quality-of-care indicators such as pathology testing and diagnosis., Aim: To undertake a comparison of telehealth and face-to-face general practice consultations to: identify if there were differences in the proportion of pathology test referrals from 2019-2020; and quantify any change in pathology test collection and follow-up patterns., Design & Setting: Retrospective observational study of routinely collected electronic patient data from 807 general practices across New South Wales (NSW) and Victoria, Australia., Method: Multivariate generalised estimating equation models were used to estimate the proportion of pathology test referrals for overall, face-to-face, and telehealth consultations. Pathology test follow-up was described through median (and interquartile range [IQR]) time., Results: Pathology test referrals declined during periods of high COVID-19 cases, falling from 10.8% in February 2020 to a low of 4.5% during the first peak in April. Overall, pathology test referrals were lower for telehealth than face-to-face consultations. Median time between referral and test collection was 3 days (IQR 1-14) for telehealth and 1 day (IQR 0-7) for face to face., Conclusion: For telehealth to become part of routine care, it is crucial that gaps in functionality, including difficulty in test referral processes, be addressed. Quality improvements supporting care practices will ensure clinicians' workflows are supported and patients receive diagnostic testing., (Copyright © 2022, The Authors.)

Background: There has been a precipitous rise in telehealth use in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding differences between face-to-face and telehealth consulting is an important component for planning the future use of telehealth services beyond the pandemic. However, there is limited evidence on whether telehealth consulting impacts medication prescribing under pandemic circumstances., Aim: To compare medication prescribing in face-to-face consultations with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australian general practice., Design & Setting: A multisite, retrospective observational study. De-identified routinely collected electronic health data were used, which were extracted from 806 general practices in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW), Australia, between April and December 2020., Method: The primary outcome measure was whether at least one medication was prescribed following a telehealth or face-to-face consultation. Data were reported by medication and for each of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system level 1 groups. The secondary outcome measure was first-time prescribing. Telehealth included both telephone and video consultations., Results: A total of 13 608 216 consultations satisfied the inclusion criteria (61.0% face to face and 39.0% telehealth). Most telehealth consultations were conducted via telephone (97.8%). Overall, 39.3% of face-to-face and 33.0% of telehealth consultations prescribed at least one medication, which is a statistically significant difference (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.379 to 1.381). The prescribing rate was greater for face-to-face versus telehealth consultations for all drug groups except ATC level 1N (nervous system)., Conclusion: Under COVID-19 restrictions in the states of Victoria and NSW, Australia, medication prescribing was higher in face-to-face consultations when compared with telehealth consultations in the study population., (Copyright © 2022, The Authors.)