Traits of patients seen via telemedicine versus in person for new-patient visits in a fertility practice.
Telemedicine
fertility
new-patient visit
Journal
F&S reports
ISSN: 2666-3341
Titre abrégé: F S Rep
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101766618
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
06
11
2020
revised:
31
03
2021
accepted:
01
04
2021
entrez:
19
7
2021
pubmed:
20
7
2021
medline:
20
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To assess the differences in demographics, the likelihood of receiving treatment, and the clinical outcomes between new patients seen via telemedicine and those seen in person in an academic fertility practice. Retrospective cohort study. University-based fertility clinic. All new patients seen via telemedicine between June 1, 2017, and February 29, 2020, were compared with an equal number of all new patients seen in person between May 1, 2019, and June 30, 2019. None. The primary outcome was receiving treatment after a new-patient visit. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the odds ratio for not receiving treatment according to distance to the clinic and duration of infertility. The secondary outcomes included treatment recommendation, time to treatment initiation, and time to positive pregnancy test (if achieved). In addition we assessed patient demographics and visit traits per patient encounter. The telemedicine and in-person groups each contained 70 patients. The following were similar between the groups: age, body mass index, Area Deprivation Index, diagnosis made at the new-patient visit, and the number of clinic contacts before starting treatment. Compared with patients who had in-person new-patient visits, those who had telemedicine new-patient visits lived farther from the clinic (mean, 223.6 vs. 69.28 miles) and had a longer duration of infertility (mean, 41.9 vs. 19.49 months). No differences were noted between the groups in the following outcomes: percent that received treatment, time to treatment initiation, or time to pregnancy. Telemedicine new-patient visits were shorter than in-person new-patient visits (mean, 56.3 ± 9.1 vs. 59.3 ± 4.6 minutes) and less likely to contain documentation of height or weight. Telemedicine appears to be of particular interest to patients who live farther from clinics and have longer durations of infertility, and it could reduce visit times. New patients seen in person and those seen via telemedicine are equally likely to pursue treatment. Telemedicine consultation for new-patient visits is feasible in an academic fertility practice and may be especially useful during a pandemic and in non-pandemic times in areas with limited access to fertility specialists.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34278358
doi: 10.1016/j.xfre.2021.04.001
pii: S2666-3341(21)00034-9
pmc: PMC8267397
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
224-229Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Author(s).
Références
Fertil Steril. 2017 Apr;107(4):1023-1027
pubmed: 28314508
AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2018 Apr 16;2017:1547-1553
pubmed: 29854224
PLoS One. 2020 Apr 13;15(4):e0231229
pubmed: 32282816
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Dec 18;69(50):1902-1905
pubmed: 33332297
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91
pubmed: 17695343
Fertil Steril. 2004 Feb;81(2):258-61
pubmed: 14967352
Hum Reprod. 2013 Nov;28(11):3118-25
pubmed: 23892321
Hum Reprod. 2008 Sep;23(9):2050-5
pubmed: 18544578
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 Jul 1;27(7):1132-1135
pubmed: 32324855
J Healthc Qual Res. 2020 Jan - Feb;35(1):27-34
pubmed: 31883955
Ann Intern Med. 2014 Dec 2;161(11):765-74
pubmed: 25437404
Fertil Steril. 2019 Sep;112(3):562-568
pubmed: 31262522
Fertil Steril. 2020 Sep;114(3):476-482
pubmed: 32912610
BMC Womens Health. 2018 Jun 5;18(1):84
pubmed: 29871622
Matern Child Health J. 2014 Sep;18(7):1667-74
pubmed: 24337814
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Aug;118(2 Pt 1):296-303
pubmed: 21775845
Int J Med Inform. 2010 Nov;79(11):736-71
pubmed: 20884286