Search

Introduction The goal of this research was to quantify the baseline status of prepandemic workplace emergency nursing telehealth as a key consideration for ongoing telehealth growth and sustainable emergency nursing care model planning. The purpose of this research was to: (1) generate national estimates of prepandemic workplace telehealth use among emergency and other inpatient hospital nurses and (2) map the geographic distribution of prepandemic workplace emergency nurse telehealth use by state of nurse residence. Methods We generated national estimates using data from the 2018 National Sample Survey of Registered Nurses. Data were analyzed using jack-knife estimation procedures coherent with the complex sampling design selected as representative of the population and requiring analysis with survey weights. Results Weighted estimates of the 161 865 emergency nurses, compared with 1 191 287 other inpatient nurses revealed more reported telehealth in the workplace setting (49% vs 34%) and individual clinical practice telehealth use (36% vs 15%) among emergency nurses. The geographic distribution of individual clinical practice emergency nurse telehealth use indicates greatest adoption per 10 000 state residents in Maine, Alaska, and Missouri with more states in the Midwest demonstrating emergency nurse adoption of telehealth into clinical practice per population than other regions in the United States. Discussion By quantifying prepandemic national telehealth use, the results provide corroborating evidence to the potential long-term adoptability and sustainability of telenursing in the emergency nursing specialty. The results also implicate the need to proactively define emergency nursing telehealth care model standards of practice, nurse competencies, and reimbursement.

Despite the rapid expansion of telehealth services, education and training regarding the telehealth modality have lagged and yet to be validated. While clinical skills are traditionally taught in undergraduate and graduate training programs, few programs currently teach telehealth-specific skills. This is particularly challenging given that both novice and experienced clinicians require training and components of that training are program-specific. Training should include clinicians, patients, their carepartners, and telepresenters as the future health care team is rapidly evolving and will require a collaborative approach. This chapter outlines the various types of telehealth education, the groups of learners for whom training should be targeted, and various models of training.

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) or on-demand telehealth describes a patient-initiated medical encounter using technology in real time—mostly related to acute care or urgent complaints. Initially created and offered by private companies, DTC telehealth is now more ubiquitous, as it has been offered by hospitals, medical centers, multi-specialty practices, and insurers. On-demand telehealth services are implemented in an effort to increase health care access, improve satisfaction and efficiency, as well as drive new revenue. This chapter outlines the types of DTC telehealth, considerations when conducting a needs assessments, implementation, business models, and quality assurance.

Objective To identify, describe, and address gaps in telehealth training at the graduate medical education level Materials and Methods We designed a 12-question survey to capture the telehealth experiences and educational opportunities for residents and fellows in the Minneapolis/St Paul, MN region. Results There were 213 responses from 51 different specialties across 7 levels of training (PGY1-7). 66% had previously completed a telehealth visit, 89% stated that they had not performed any telehealth prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and only 15% of respondents had any formal telehealth training. Conclusions & Recommendations While telehealth volumes have seen exponential increases, training on how to effectively and efficiently carry out telehealth visits for medical trainees at the GME level has remained relatively stagnant or even non-existent. We provide examples of specialty-specific telehealth competencies, and hope that improving telehealth training quality will ultimately expand access, improve outcomes of chronic disease management and strengthen the patient-provider relationship across all specialties.

Introduction Telehealth has the potential to significantly change the specialty of emergency medicine (EM) and has rapidly expanded in EM during the COVID pandemic; however, it is unclear how EM should intersect with telehealth. The field lacks a unified research agenda with priorities for scientific questions on telehealth in EM. Methods Through the 2020 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine's annual consensus conference, experts in EM and telehealth created a research agenda for the topic. The multiyear process used a modified Delphi technique to develop research questions related to telehealth in EM. Research questions were excluded from the final research agenda if they did not meet a threshold of at least 80% of votes indicating "important" or "very important." Results Round 1 of voting included 94 research questions, expanded to 103 questions in round 2 and refined to 36 questions for the final vote. Consensus occurred with a final set of 24 important research questions spanning five breakout group topics. Each breakout group domain was represented in the final set of questions. Examples of the questions include: "Among underserved populations, what are mechanisms by which disparities in emergency care delivery may be exacerbated or ameliorated by telehealth" (health care access) and "In what situations should the quality and safety of telehealth be compared to in-person care and in what situations should it be compared to no care" (quality and safety). Conclusion The primary finding from the process was the breadth of gaps in the evidence for telehealth in EM and telehealth in general. Our consensus process identified priority research questions for the use of and evaluation of telehealth in EM to fill the current knowledge gaps. Support should be provided to answer the research questions to guide the evidenced-based development of telehealth in EM.

Telehealth or using technology for a remote medical encounter has become an efficient solution for safe patient care during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 or COVID-19 pandemic. This medium allows patient immediate healthcare access without the need for an in-person visit. We designed a time-sensitive, practical, effective and innovative scale-up of telehealth services as a response to the demand for COVID-19 evaluation and testing. As more patients made appointments through the institution’s telehealth programme, we increased the number of clinicians available. JeffConnect, the acute care telehealth programme, was expanded to increase staffing from a standing staff of 37–187 doctors within 72 hours. Telehealth care clinicians primarily trained in emergency medicine, internal medicine and family medicine followed a patient decision pathway to risk stratify patients into three groups: home quarantine no testing, home quarantine with outpatient COVID-19 testing and referral for in-person evaluation in the ED, for symptomatic and potentially unstable patients.

BACKGROUND Telehealth has emerged as a crucial component of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic emergency response. Simply stated, telehealth is a tool to provide health care from a distance. Jefferson Health has leveraged its acute care telehealth platform to screen, order testing, and manage patients with COVID-19–related concerns. OBJECTIVE This study aims to describe the expansion and results of using a telehealth program to increase access to care while minimizing additional potential exposures during the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS Screening algorithms for patients with SARS-CoV-2–related complaints were created, and 150 new clinicians were trained within 72 hours to address increased patient demand. Simultaneously, Jefferson Health created mobile testing sites throughout eastern Pennsylvania and the southern New Jersey region. Visit volume, the number of SARS-CoV-2 tests ordered, and the number of positive tests were evaluated, and the volume was compared with preceding time periods. RESULTS From March 8, 2020, to April 11, 2020, 4663 patients were screened using telehealth, representing a surge in visit volume. There were 1521 patients sent to mobile testing sites, and they received a telephone call from a centralized call center for results. Of the patients who were tested, nearly 20% (n=301) had a positive result. CONCLUSIONS Our model demonstrates how using telehealth for a referral to central testing sites can increase access to community-based care, decrease clinician exposure, and minimize the demand for personal protective equipment. The scaling of this innovation may allow health care systems to focus on preparing for and delivering hospital-based care needs.

Background Telehealth has emerged as a crucial component of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic emergency response. Simply stated, telehealth is a tool to provide health care from a distance. Jefferson Health has leveraged its acute care telehealth platform to screen, order testing, and manage patients with COVID-19–related concerns. Objective This study aims to describe the expansion and results of using a telehealth program to increase access to care while minimizing additional potential exposures during the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Screening algorithms for patients with SARS-CoV-2–related complaints were created, and 150 new clinicians were trained within 72 hours to address increased patient demand. Simultaneously, Jefferson Health created mobile testing sites throughout eastern Pennsylvania and the southern New Jersey region. Visit volume, the number of SARS-CoV-2 tests ordered, and the number of positive tests were evaluated, and the volume was compared with preceding time periods. Results From March 8, 2020, to April 11, 2020, 4663 patients were screened using telehealth, representing a surge in visit volume. There were 1521 patients sent to mobile testing sites, and they received a telephone call from a centralized call center for results. Of the patients who were tested, nearly 20% (n=301) had a positive result. Conclusions Our model demonstrates how using telehealth for a referral to central testing sites can increase access to community-based care, decrease clinician exposure, and minimize the demand for personal protective equipment. The scaling of this innovation may allow health care systems to focus on preparing for and delivering hospital-based care needs.

The American College of Emergency Physicians Emergency Telehealth Section was charged with development of a working definition of emergency telehealth that aligns with the College’s definition of emergency medicine. A modified Delphi method was used by the section membership who represented telehealth providers in both private and public health-care delivery systems, academia and industry, rural and urban settings. Presented in this manuscript is the final definition of emergency telehealth developed with an additional six clarifying statements to address the context of the definition. Emergency telehealth is a core domain of emergency medicine and is inclusive of remotely providing all types of care for acute conditions of any kind requiring expeditious care irrespective of any prior relationship. The development of this definition is important to the global community of emergency physicians and all patients seeking acute care to ensure that appropriately trained clinicians are providing the highest quality of emergency services via the telehealth modality. We recommend implementing emergency telehealth in a manner that ensures appropriate qualifications of providers, appropriate/parity reimbursement for telehealth services and, most importantly, the delivery of quality care to patients in a safe, efficient, timely and cost-effective manner.

The Ray et al study1 of DTC company antibiotic prescribing compared with urgent care and pediatricians’ offices for ARI brought up a legitimate concern about overprescribing antibiotics over telehealth. There were several limitations to this study, eloquently outlined by Jeffrey S. Gerber,2 which included looking at filled prescriptions, data from only 1 company, unknown sociodemographic factors, and total telehealth visits being a small percentage of overall visits. Regardless, the authors and the commentator are absolutely right; concern about antibiotic prescribing is legitimate. As we deal with the ever-growing threat of antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria, we, as physicians, have … E-mail: aditi.joshi{at}jefferson.edu