User login
Adults with diabetes who participated in telehealth visits reported similar levels of care, trust in the healthcare system, and patient-centered communication compared to those who had in-person visits, a cross-sectional study suggested.
The authors urged continued integration of telehealth into diabetes care beyond December 31, 2024, when the pandemic public health emergency ends, potentially limiting such services.
The study “provides population-level evidence that telehealth can deliver care quality comparable to in-person visits in diabetes management,” lead author Young-Rock Hong, PhD, MPH, an assistant professor in the University of Florida, Gainesville, told this news organization.
“Perhaps the most meaningful finding was the high utilization of telephone-only visits among older adults,” he said. “This has important policy implications, particularly as some insurers and healthcare systems have pushed to restrict telehealth coverage to video-only visits.”
“Maintaining telephone visit coverage is crucial for equitable access, especially for older adults who may be less comfortable with video technology; those with limited internet access; or patients facing other barriers to video visits,” he explained.
The study was published online in BMJ Open.
Video-only, Voice-only, Both
The researchers did a secondary analysis of data from the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey, a nationally representative survey that includes information on health communication and knowledge and perceptions about all health conditions among US adults aged ≥ 18 years.
Participants had a self-reported diagnosis of type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The mean age was 59.4 years; 50% were women; and 53% were non-Hispanic White individuals.
Primary and secondary outcomes were use of telehealth in the last 12-months; telehealth modality; overall perception of quality of care; perceived trust in the healthcare system; and patient-centered communication score.
In the analysis of 1116 participants representing 33.6 million individuals, 48.1% reported telehealth use in the past 12 months.
Telehealth users were more likely to be younger and women with higher household incomes and health insurance coverage; live in metropolitan areas; and have multiple chronic conditions, poorer perceived health status, and more frequent physician visits than nonusers.
After adjustment, adults aged ≥ 65 years had a significantly lower likelihood of telehealth use than those ages 18-49 years (odds ratio [OR], 0.43).
Higher income and more frequent healthcare visits were predictors of telehealth usage, with no significant differences across race, education, or location.
Those with a household income between $35,000 and $74,999 had more than double the likelihood of telehealth use (OR, 2.14) than those with incomes below $35,000.
Among telehealth users, 39.3% reported having video-only; 35%, phone (voice)-only; and 25.7%, both modalities. Among those aged ≥ 65 years, 55.5% used phone calls only and 25.5% used video only. In contrast, those aged 18-49 years had higher rates of video-only use (36.1%) and combined video/phone use (31.2%).
Healthcare provider recommendation (68.1%) was the most common reason for telehealth use, followed by convenience (57.7%), avoiding potential COVID-19 exposure (48.1%), and obtaining advice about the need for in-person care (23.6%).
Nonusers said they preferred in-person visits and also cited privacy concerns and technology challenges.
Patient-reported quality-of-care outcomes were comparable between telehealth users and nonusers, with no significant differences by telehealth modality or area of residence (urban or rural).
Around 70% of individuals with diabetes in both groups rated their quality of care as “excellent” and “very good;” fewer than 10% rated their care as “fair” and “poor.”
Similarly, trust in the healthcare system was comparable between users and nonusers: 41.3% of telehealth users 41% of nonusers reported trusting the healthcare system “very much.” Patient-centered communication scores were also similar between users and nonusers.
Telehealth appears to be a good option from the providers’ perspective as well, according to the authors. A previous study by the team found more than 80% of US physicians intended to continue telehealth beyond the pandemic.
“The recent unanimous bipartisan passage of the Telehealth Modernization Act by the House Energy & Commerce Committee signals strong political support for extending telehealth flexibilities through 2026,” Hong said. “The bill addresses key access issues by permanently removing geographic restrictions, expanding eligible providers, and maintaining audio-only coverage — provisions that align with our study’s findings about the importance of telephone visits, particularly for older adults and underserved populations.”
There is concern that extending telehealth services might increase Medicare spending by over $2 billion, he added. “While this may be a valid concern, there is a need for more robust evidence regarding the overall value of telehealth services — ie, the ‘benefits’ they provide relative to their costs and outcomes.”
Reassuring, but More Research Needed
COVID prompted “dramatic shifts” in care delivery from in-person to telehealth, Kevin Peterson, MD, MPH, American Diabetes Association vice president of primary care told this news organization. “The authors’ findings provide reassurance that these changes provided for additional convenience in care delivery without being associated with compromises in patient-reported care quality.”
However, he said, “the study does not necessarily capture representative samples of rural and underserved populations, making the impact of telehealth on health equity difficult to determine.” In addition, although patient-perceived care quality did not change with telehealth delivery, the study “does not address impacts on safety, clinical outcomes, equity, costs, or other important measures.”
Furthermore, he noted, “this is an association study that occurred during the dramatic changes brought about by COVID. It may not represent provider or patient preferences that characterize the role of telehealth under more normal circumstances.”
For now, clinicians should be aware that “initial evidence suggests that telehealth can be integrated into care without significantly compromising the patient’s perception of the quality of care,” he concluded.
No funding was declared. Hong and Peterson reported no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adults with diabetes who participated in telehealth visits reported similar levels of care, trust in the healthcare system, and patient-centered communication compared to those who had in-person visits, a cross-sectional study suggested.
The authors urged continued integration of telehealth into diabetes care beyond December 31, 2024, when the pandemic public health emergency ends, potentially limiting such services.
The study “provides population-level evidence that telehealth can deliver care quality comparable to in-person visits in diabetes management,” lead author Young-Rock Hong, PhD, MPH, an assistant professor in the University of Florida, Gainesville, told this news organization.
“Perhaps the most meaningful finding was the high utilization of telephone-only visits among older adults,” he said. “This has important policy implications, particularly as some insurers and healthcare systems have pushed to restrict telehealth coverage to video-only visits.”
“Maintaining telephone visit coverage is crucial for equitable access, especially for older adults who may be less comfortable with video technology; those with limited internet access; or patients facing other barriers to video visits,” he explained.
The study was published online in BMJ Open.
Video-only, Voice-only, Both
The researchers did a secondary analysis of data from the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey, a nationally representative survey that includes information on health communication and knowledge and perceptions about all health conditions among US adults aged ≥ 18 years.
Participants had a self-reported diagnosis of type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The mean age was 59.4 years; 50% were women; and 53% were non-Hispanic White individuals.
Primary and secondary outcomes were use of telehealth in the last 12-months; telehealth modality; overall perception of quality of care; perceived trust in the healthcare system; and patient-centered communication score.
In the analysis of 1116 participants representing 33.6 million individuals, 48.1% reported telehealth use in the past 12 months.
Telehealth users were more likely to be younger and women with higher household incomes and health insurance coverage; live in metropolitan areas; and have multiple chronic conditions, poorer perceived health status, and more frequent physician visits than nonusers.
After adjustment, adults aged ≥ 65 years had a significantly lower likelihood of telehealth use than those ages 18-49 years (odds ratio [OR], 0.43).
Higher income and more frequent healthcare visits were predictors of telehealth usage, with no significant differences across race, education, or location.
Those with a household income between $35,000 and $74,999 had more than double the likelihood of telehealth use (OR, 2.14) than those with incomes below $35,000.
Among telehealth users, 39.3% reported having video-only; 35%, phone (voice)-only; and 25.7%, both modalities. Among those aged ≥ 65 years, 55.5% used phone calls only and 25.5% used video only. In contrast, those aged 18-49 years had higher rates of video-only use (36.1%) and combined video/phone use (31.2%).
Healthcare provider recommendation (68.1%) was the most common reason for telehealth use, followed by convenience (57.7%), avoiding potential COVID-19 exposure (48.1%), and obtaining advice about the need for in-person care (23.6%).
Nonusers said they preferred in-person visits and also cited privacy concerns and technology challenges.
Patient-reported quality-of-care outcomes were comparable between telehealth users and nonusers, with no significant differences by telehealth modality or area of residence (urban or rural).
Around 70% of individuals with diabetes in both groups rated their quality of care as “excellent” and “very good;” fewer than 10% rated their care as “fair” and “poor.”
Similarly, trust in the healthcare system was comparable between users and nonusers: 41.3% of telehealth users 41% of nonusers reported trusting the healthcare system “very much.” Patient-centered communication scores were also similar between users and nonusers.
Telehealth appears to be a good option from the providers’ perspective as well, according to the authors. A previous study by the team found more than 80% of US physicians intended to continue telehealth beyond the pandemic.
“The recent unanimous bipartisan passage of the Telehealth Modernization Act by the House Energy & Commerce Committee signals strong political support for extending telehealth flexibilities through 2026,” Hong said. “The bill addresses key access issues by permanently removing geographic restrictions, expanding eligible providers, and maintaining audio-only coverage — provisions that align with our study’s findings about the importance of telephone visits, particularly for older adults and underserved populations.”
There is concern that extending telehealth services might increase Medicare spending by over $2 billion, he added. “While this may be a valid concern, there is a need for more robust evidence regarding the overall value of telehealth services — ie, the ‘benefits’ they provide relative to their costs and outcomes.”
Reassuring, but More Research Needed
COVID prompted “dramatic shifts” in care delivery from in-person to telehealth, Kevin Peterson, MD, MPH, American Diabetes Association vice president of primary care told this news organization. “The authors’ findings provide reassurance that these changes provided for additional convenience in care delivery without being associated with compromises in patient-reported care quality.”
However, he said, “the study does not necessarily capture representative samples of rural and underserved populations, making the impact of telehealth on health equity difficult to determine.” In addition, although patient-perceived care quality did not change with telehealth delivery, the study “does not address impacts on safety, clinical outcomes, equity, costs, or other important measures.”
Furthermore, he noted, “this is an association study that occurred during the dramatic changes brought about by COVID. It may not represent provider or patient preferences that characterize the role of telehealth under more normal circumstances.”
For now, clinicians should be aware that “initial evidence suggests that telehealth can be integrated into care without significantly compromising the patient’s perception of the quality of care,” he concluded.
No funding was declared. Hong and Peterson reported no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adults with diabetes who participated in telehealth visits reported similar levels of care, trust in the healthcare system, and patient-centered communication compared to those who had in-person visits, a cross-sectional study suggested.
The authors urged continued integration of telehealth into diabetes care beyond December 31, 2024, when the pandemic public health emergency ends, potentially limiting such services.
The study “provides population-level evidence that telehealth can deliver care quality comparable to in-person visits in diabetes management,” lead author Young-Rock Hong, PhD, MPH, an assistant professor in the University of Florida, Gainesville, told this news organization.
“Perhaps the most meaningful finding was the high utilization of telephone-only visits among older adults,” he said. “This has important policy implications, particularly as some insurers and healthcare systems have pushed to restrict telehealth coverage to video-only visits.”
“Maintaining telephone visit coverage is crucial for equitable access, especially for older adults who may be less comfortable with video technology; those with limited internet access; or patients facing other barriers to video visits,” he explained.
The study was published online in BMJ Open.
Video-only, Voice-only, Both
The researchers did a secondary analysis of data from the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey, a nationally representative survey that includes information on health communication and knowledge and perceptions about all health conditions among US adults aged ≥ 18 years.
Participants had a self-reported diagnosis of type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The mean age was 59.4 years; 50% were women; and 53% were non-Hispanic White individuals.
Primary and secondary outcomes were use of telehealth in the last 12-months; telehealth modality; overall perception of quality of care; perceived trust in the healthcare system; and patient-centered communication score.
In the analysis of 1116 participants representing 33.6 million individuals, 48.1% reported telehealth use in the past 12 months.
Telehealth users were more likely to be younger and women with higher household incomes and health insurance coverage; live in metropolitan areas; and have multiple chronic conditions, poorer perceived health status, and more frequent physician visits than nonusers.
After adjustment, adults aged ≥ 65 years had a significantly lower likelihood of telehealth use than those ages 18-49 years (odds ratio [OR], 0.43).
Higher income and more frequent healthcare visits were predictors of telehealth usage, with no significant differences across race, education, or location.
Those with a household income between $35,000 and $74,999 had more than double the likelihood of telehealth use (OR, 2.14) than those with incomes below $35,000.
Among telehealth users, 39.3% reported having video-only; 35%, phone (voice)-only; and 25.7%, both modalities. Among those aged ≥ 65 years, 55.5% used phone calls only and 25.5% used video only. In contrast, those aged 18-49 years had higher rates of video-only use (36.1%) and combined video/phone use (31.2%).
Healthcare provider recommendation (68.1%) was the most common reason for telehealth use, followed by convenience (57.7%), avoiding potential COVID-19 exposure (48.1%), and obtaining advice about the need for in-person care (23.6%).
Nonusers said they preferred in-person visits and also cited privacy concerns and technology challenges.
Patient-reported quality-of-care outcomes were comparable between telehealth users and nonusers, with no significant differences by telehealth modality or area of residence (urban or rural).
Around 70% of individuals with diabetes in both groups rated their quality of care as “excellent” and “very good;” fewer than 10% rated their care as “fair” and “poor.”
Similarly, trust in the healthcare system was comparable between users and nonusers: 41.3% of telehealth users 41% of nonusers reported trusting the healthcare system “very much.” Patient-centered communication scores were also similar between users and nonusers.
Telehealth appears to be a good option from the providers’ perspective as well, according to the authors. A previous study by the team found more than 80% of US physicians intended to continue telehealth beyond the pandemic.
“The recent unanimous bipartisan passage of the Telehealth Modernization Act by the House Energy & Commerce Committee signals strong political support for extending telehealth flexibilities through 2026,” Hong said. “The bill addresses key access issues by permanently removing geographic restrictions, expanding eligible providers, and maintaining audio-only coverage — provisions that align with our study’s findings about the importance of telephone visits, particularly for older adults and underserved populations.”
There is concern that extending telehealth services might increase Medicare spending by over $2 billion, he added. “While this may be a valid concern, there is a need for more robust evidence regarding the overall value of telehealth services — ie, the ‘benefits’ they provide relative to their costs and outcomes.”
Reassuring, but More Research Needed
COVID prompted “dramatic shifts” in care delivery from in-person to telehealth, Kevin Peterson, MD, MPH, American Diabetes Association vice president of primary care told this news organization. “The authors’ findings provide reassurance that these changes provided for additional convenience in care delivery without being associated with compromises in patient-reported care quality.”
However, he said, “the study does not necessarily capture representative samples of rural and underserved populations, making the impact of telehealth on health equity difficult to determine.” In addition, although patient-perceived care quality did not change with telehealth delivery, the study “does not address impacts on safety, clinical outcomes, equity, costs, or other important measures.”
Furthermore, he noted, “this is an association study that occurred during the dramatic changes brought about by COVID. It may not represent provider or patient preferences that characterize the role of telehealth under more normal circumstances.”
For now, clinicians should be aware that “initial evidence suggests that telehealth can be integrated into care without significantly compromising the patient’s perception of the quality of care,” he concluded.
No funding was declared. Hong and Peterson reported no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM BMJ OPEN