Search

Introduction: Telehealth is becoming integral to health care delivery, which may create a higher need for better internet. This is the first study to examine whether users are willing to spend more on their internet if they are (1) more experienced in using telehealth, (2) more optimistic about telehealth benefits, and (3) less concerned about the difficulty of using telehealth. Methods: We surveyed 5,200 Americans about their willingness to pay (WTP) for internet speed and quality on the one hand, and their (1) prior use of telehealth, (2) opinion about the benefits of telehealth, and (3) opinion about the difficulties of using telehealth. We stratified the sample using the three aspects above and conducted a conjoint analysis to estimate the WTP for internet speed and quality within each stratum. Results: Compared with respondents who had never used telehealth, respondents who had used five to six different types of telehealth services were willing to spend 50.4% more on their internet plans. Users who most firmly believed in the benefits of telehealth were willing to spend 59.2% more than the most pessimistic users. Users who had the lowest concerns about the difficulty of using telehealth were willing to spend 114% more than users with the most perceived difficulty. Discussion: We found strong ties between the WTP for internet and prior telehealth use and perceptions of telehealth benefits and barriers. Thus, internet expenditures may be influenced by users' anticipation of using telehealth. Future studies may investigate the causality of the relationship.

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic brought about renewed interest and investment in telehealth, while also highlighting persistent health disparities in the Southern states. Little is known about the characteristics of those utilizing telehealth services in Arkansas, a rural Southern state. We sought to compare the characteristics of telehealth utilizers and nonutilizers among Medicare beneficiaries in Arkansas before the COVID-19 public health emergency to provide a baseline for future research investigating disparities in telehealth utilization. Methods: We used Arkansas Medicare beneficiary data (2018-2019) to model telehealth use. We included interactions to assess how the association between the number of chronic conditions and telehealth was moderated by race/ethnicity and rurality, adjusted for covariates. Results: Overall telehealth utilization in 2019 was low ( n  = 4,463; 1.1%). The adjusted odds of utilizing telehealth was higher for non-Hispanic Black/African Americans (vs. white, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.17-1.52), rural beneficiaries (aOR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.79-2.21), and those with more chronic conditions (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.21-1.25). Race/ethnicity and rurality were significant moderators, such that the association between the number of chronic conditions and telehealth was strongest among white and among rural beneficiaries. Discussion: Among the 2019 Arkansas Medicare beneficiaries, having more chronic conditions was most strongly associated with telehealth use among white and rural individuals, while the effect was not as pronounced for Black/African American and urban individuals. Our findings suggest that advances in telehealth are not benefiting all Americans equally, with aging minoritized communities continuing to engage with more strained and underresourced health systems. Future research should investigate how upstream factors such as structural racism perpetuate poor health outcomes.

Purpose: To assess the factors associated with offering remote patient monitoring (RPM) services. Methods: We integrated three datasets: (1) 2019-2020 Area Health Resource Files, (2) 2019 American Community Survey, and (3) 2019 American Hospitals Association annual survey using county Federal Information Processing Standards code to evaluate associations between hospital characteristics and county-level demographic factors with provision of (1) post-discharge, (2) chronic care, (3) other RPM services, and (4) any of these three RPM service categories. These outcomes were analyzed using multi-level, mixed-effects multivariate logistic regression modeling to account for county-level clustering of hospitals. Findings: Among 3,381 hospitals, 1,354 (40.0%) provided any RPM services. Being part of a clinically integrated network (CIN) and private, non-profit (vs. public) ownership were respectively associated with 104.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 69.4-146.8%; p < 0.001) and 30.4% (95% CI: 2.5-66.0%; p  = 0.031) higher odds of providing any RPM services. Critical access hospital (CAH) designation, for-profit (vs. public) ownership, and location in the South (vs. Northeast) were associated with significantly lowering odds of providing any RPM services by 36.2% (95% CI: 14.2-52.6%; p  = 0.003), 70.1% (95% CI: 56.0-79.6%; p < 0.001), and 34.0% (95% CI: 2.8-55.1%; p  = 0.035), respectively. Similar trends were found with the various RPM service categories. Conclusions: The factors most associated with provision of any RPM services were hospital-level factors. Specifically, being part of a CIN and private, non-profit ownership had the highest positive associations with offering RPM services whereas location in the South and CAH designation had the strongest negative associations. Further studies are needed to understand the reasons behind these associations.