OBJECTIVES: To describe the status of telemedicine in rural America, the characteristics of health care facilities using telemedicine technologies to serve rural patients, the volume and scope of services delivered, the costs associated with this care, and the funding sources. METHODS: A screening survey was mailed to all 2472 nonfederal U.S. hospitals located outside metropolitan areas. Nonrespondents were interviewed by telephone. Those who reported some form of telemedicine capability, and all the telemedicine affiliates they named, became the sample for a detailed follow-up survey (N = 558) in January 1996. RESULTS: Ninety-six per cent of all rural hospitals responded to the screener survey, and 89% of the 558 identified telemedicine facilities responded to the detailed follow-up survey (total respondents = 499). In this cross-sectional study, two thirds of the telemedicine respondents (340) were using only teleradiology. Of the 159 telemedicine programs pursuing other clinical applications, 67% had been using telemedicine for 2 years or less. Telemedicine facilities have tried many clinical specialty applications, the most common being radiology, cardiology, and orthopedics. At this early stage of technology diffusion, reported utilization of the telemedicine systems for both clinical and nonclinical applications was very low, and the unit costs of equipment acquisition and operating expenses were corresponding high. Programs most commonly used hospital financial resources and federal grants and contracts for support. Telemedicine networks planned to grow from an average of nine facilities to an average of 13 facilities during 1996. CONCLUSIONS: Investment has been rapid in telemedicine, and the installed base reported in this survey was large, sophisticated, and growing rapidly. Nonclinical uses of the technology (e.g., meetings, training sessions, continuing medical education) were more common than clinical consultations, although the volumes of both were quite low. Investment and expansion to new sites were occurring in the absence of a favorable payor reimbursement environment and in spite of low volume at most operating sites, demonstrating optimism about the future of telemedicine and the potential for nonclinical applications.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the status of telemedicine in rural America, the characteristics of health care facilities using telemedicine technologies to serve rural patients, the volume and scope of services delivered, the costs associated with this care, and the funding sources. METHODS: A screening survey was mailed to all 2472 nonfederal U.S. hospitals located outside metropolitan areas. Nonrespondents were interviewed by telephone. Those who reported some form of telemedicine capability, and all the telemedicine affiliates they named, became the sample for a detailed follow-up survey (N = 558) in January 1996. RESULTS: Ninety-six per cent of all rural hospitals responded to the screener survey, and 89% of the 558 identified telemedicine facilities responded to the detailed follow-up survey (total respondents = 499). In this cross-sectional study, two thirds of the telemedicine respondents (340) were using only teleradiology. Of the 159 telemedicine programs pursuing other clinical applications, 67% had been using telemedicine for 2 years or less. Telemedicine facilities have tried many clinical specialty applications, the most common being radiology, cardiology, and orthopedics. At this early stage of technology diffusion, reported utilization of the telemedicine systems for both clinical and nonclinical applications was very low, and the unit costs of equipment acquisition and operating expenses were corresponding high. Programs most commonly used hospital financial resources and federal grants and contracts for support. Telemedicine networks planned to grow from an average of nine facilities to an average of 13 facilities during 1996. CONCLUSIONS: Investment has been rapid in telemedicine, and the installed base reported in this survey was large, sophisticated, and growing rapidly. Nonclinical uses of the technology (e.g., meetings, training sessions, continuing medical education) were more common than clinical consultations, although the volumes of both were quite low. Investment and expansion to new sites were occurring in the absence of a favorable payor reimbursement environment and in spite of low volume at most operating sites, demonstrating optimism about the future of telemedicine and the potential for nonclinical applications.