Search

Introduction: Telehealth is commonly used to connect emergency department (ED) patients with specialists or resources required for their care. Its infrastructure requires substantial upfront and ongoing investment from an ED or hospital and may be more difficult to implement in lower-resourced settings. Our aim was to examine for an association between ED payer mix and receipt of telehealth services. Methods: Using data from the National Emergency Department Inventory (NEDI)-USA 2016 survey, we categorized EDs based on receipt of telehealth services (yes/no). The NEDI-USA data for EDs in New York state was linked with data from state ED datasets (SEDD) and state inpatient data (SID) to determine EDs’ payer mix (percent self-pay or Medicaid). Other ED characteristics of interest were rural location, academic status, and annual ED visit volume. We compared EDs with and without telehealth receipt, and used a logistic regression model to examine the relationship between ED payer mix and telehealth receipt after accounting for other ED characteristics. Results: Of the 162 New York EDs in the SEDD-SID dataset, 160 (99%) were linked to the NEDI-USA dataset and 133 of those responded (83%) to the survey. Telehealth receipt was reported by 48 EDs (36%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 28-44%). Emergency departments with and without telehealth receipt were similar (all P >0.40) with respect to rurality (6% vs 9%, respectively), academic status (13% vs 8%), and annual volume (median 36,728 vs 43,000). By contrast, median percent of Medicaid or self-pay patients was lower in telehealth EDs (36%) vs non-telehealth EDs (45%, P = 0.02). In adjusted analysis, increasing proportion of Medicaid and self-pay patients was associated with decreased odds of telehealth receipt (odds ratio 0.87 per 5% increase; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99). Rural location, academic status, and ED volume were not significantly associated with odds of ED telehealth receipt in the adjusted model. Conclusion: Among EDs in the state of New York, increasing proportion of self-pay and Medicaid patients was associated with decreased odds of ED telehealth receipt, even after accounting for rural location, academic status, and ED volume. The findings support the need for additional infrastructural investment in EDs serving a greater proportion of disadvantaged patients to ensure equitable access.

Introduction: Telemedicine connects emergency departments (ED) with resources necessaryfor patient care; its use has not been characterized nationally, or even regionally. Our primaryobjective was to describe the prevalence of telemedicine use in New England EDs and theclinical applications of use. Secondarily, we aimed to determine if telemedicine use wasassociated with consultant availability and to identify ED characteristics associated withtelemedicine use.Methods: We analyzed data from the National Emergency Department Inventory-New Englandsurvey, which assessed basic ED characteristics in 2014. The survey queried directors of everyED (n=195) in the six New England states (excluding federal hospitals and college infirmaries).Descriptive statistics characterized ED telemedicine use; multivariable logistic regressionidentified independent predictors of use.Results: Of the 169 responding EDs (87% response rate), 82 (49%) reported usingtelemedicine. Telemedicine EDs were more likely to be rural (18% of users vs. 7% of nonusers,p=0.03); less likely to be academic (1% of users vs. 11% of non-users, p=0.01); andless likely to have 24/7 access to neurology (p

There is little evidence on the reliability of the video-based telehealth physical examinations. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of a physician-directed abdominal examination using telehealth. This was a prospective, blinded observational study of patients >19 years of age presenting with abdominal pain to a large, academic emergency department. In addition to their usual care, patients had a video-based telehealth examination by an emergency physician early in the visit. We compared the in-person and telehealth providers' decisions on imaging. Thirty patients were enrolled and providers' recommendations for imaging were YES (telehealth: 18 (60%); in-person: 22 (73%)), UNSURE (telehealth: 9 (30%); in-person: 2 (7%)) and NO (telehealth: 6 (20%); in-person: 3 (10%)). There were 20 patients for whom both telehealth and in-person providers were not unsure; of these, 16 (80%, 95% confidence interval 56.3–94.3%) patients had a provider agreement on the need for imaging. While the use of video-based telehealth may be feasible for patients seeking emergency department care for abdominal pain, further study is needed to determine how it may be safely deployed. Currently, caution should be exercised when evaluating the need for abdominal imaging remotely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the natural world, learning emerges from the joy of play, experimentation, and inquiry as part of everyday life. However, this kind of informal learning is often difficult to integrate within structured educational curricula. This report describes an educational program that embeds naturalistic learning into formal high school, college, and graduate school science class work. Our experience is based on work with hundreds of high school, college, and graduate students enrolled in traditional science classes in which mannequin simulators were used to teach physiological principles. Specific case scenarios were integrated into the curriculum as problem-solving exercises chosen to accentuate the basic science objectives of the course. This report also highlights the historic and theoretical basis for the use of mannequin simulators as an important physiology education tool and outlines how the authors' experience in healthcare education has been effectively translated to nonclinical student populations. Particular areas of focus include critical-thinking and problem-solving behaviors and student reflections on the impact of the teaching approach. (Contains 3 tables.)

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to a novel, home-based COVID Virtual Observation Unit (CVOU) from an urban, university-affiliated emergency department with ∼112,000 annual visits. Telephone-based survey questions were administered by nursing staff working with the program. Of 402 patients enrolled in the CVOU, 221 (55%) were able to be contacted during the study period; 180 (45%) agreed to participate in the telephone interview. Overall, 95% (169 out of 177) of the surveyed patients reported 8 to 10 on the likelihood to recommend CVOU and 82% (100 out of 122) rated the quality of care as 10 out of 10. Over 90% of respondents reported that all role groups (nurses, paramedics, and physicians) treated them with courtesy and respect, explained things in an understandable way, and listened to them carefully. Over 80% of respondents reported that the program kept them at home. In summary, patient experiences with this novel home-based care program were highly positive. These data help underscore the importance of patient-centeredness in home-based care, and further support the concept of these innovative care models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic pushed hospitals to deliver care outside of their four walls. To successfully scale virtual care delivery, it is important to understand how its implementation affects frontline workers, including their teamwork and patient-provider interactions. We conducted in-depth interviews of 17 clinicians and staff involved with the COVID-19 Virtual Observation Unit (CVOU) in the emergency department (ED) of an academic hospital. The program leveraged remote patient monitoring and mobile integrated health care. In the CVOU (vs. the ED), participants observed increases in interactions among clinicians and staff, patient participation in care delivery, attention to nonmedical factors, and involvement of coordinators and paramedics in patient care. These changes were associated with unintended, positive consequences for staff, namely, feeling heard, experience of meaningfulness, and positive attitudes toward virtual care. This study advances research on reconfiguration of roles following implementation of new practices using digital tools, virtual work interactions, and at-home care delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]