Telehealth visit type and patient-reported outcomes among patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND

Relaxed licensing restrictions on telehealth use during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed broad use irrespective of visit type. As these telehealth waivers expire, optimal uses of telehealth must be assessed to inform policy and clinical care. We evaluated patient experience associated with telehealth and in-person new or established visits.

METHODS

Patients seen in-person and via telehealth for urologic cancer care from August 2019 to June 2022 received a survey on satisfaction with care, perceptions of communication during their visit, travel time, travel costs, and days of work missed. We assessed survey responses with descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed for 1,031 patient visits (N = 494 new visits, N = 537 established visits). Satisfaction rates were high for all visit modalities among new and established patients (mean score range 59.9-60.7 [maximum 63], P > 0.05). Patient-rated quality of the encounter did not differ by visit type and modality (P > 0.05, for nearly all comparisons). New in-person patient visits were associated with significantly higher travel costs (mean $496.10, SD $1021) compared with new telehealth visits (mean $26.60, SD $141; P < 0.001); 27% of new in-person patients required plane travel and 41% required a hotel stay (P < 0.001 vs. 0.8% and 3.2% of new telehealth patients, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfaction outcomes among patients with urologic cancer receiving new patient telehealth care equaled those of new patients cared for in-person while costs were significantly lower. Offering telehealth exemption beyond COVID-19 licensing waivers to include new patient visits would allow for ongoing delivery of high-quality urologic cancer care irrespective of geographic location.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.