BACKGROUND: Pediatric emergency telemedicine has the potential to improve the quality of pediatric emergency care in underserved areas, reducing socioeconomic disparities in access to care. Yet, telemedicine in the pediatric emergency setting remains underutilized. We aimed to assess the current state of pediatric emergency telemedicine and identify unique success factors and barriers to widespread use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a telephone survey of current, former, and planned pediatric emergency telemedicine programs in the United States. RESULTS: We surveyed 25 respondents at 20 unique sites, including 12 current, 5 planned, and 3 closed programs. Existing programs were located primarily in academic medical centers and served an average of 12.5 spoke sites (range, 1-30). Respondents identified five major barriers, including difficulties in cross-hospital credentialing, integration into established workflows, usability of technology, lack of physician buy-in, and misaligned incentives between patients and providers. Uneven reimbursement was also cited as a barrier, although this was not seen as major because most programs were able to operate independent of reimbursement, and many were not actively seeking reimbursement even when allowed. Critical success factors included selecting spoke hospitals based on receptivity rather than perceived need and cultivating clinical champions at local sites. CONCLUSIONS: Although pediatric emergency telemedicine confronts many of the same challenges of other telemedicine applications, reimbursement is relatively less significant, and workflow disruption are relatively more significant in this setting. Although certain challenges such as credentialing can be addressed with available policy options, others such as the culture of transfer at rural emergency departments require innovative approaches.
BACKGROUND: Pediatric emergency telemedicine has the potential to improve the quality of pediatric emergency care in underserved areas, reducing socioeconomic disparities in access to care. Yet, telemedicine in the pediatric emergency setting remains underutilized. We aimed to assess the current state of pediatric emergency telemedicine and identify unique success factors and barriers to widespread use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a telephone survey of current, former, and planned pediatric emergency telemedicine programs in the United States. RESULTS: We surveyed 25 respondents at 20 unique sites, including 12 current, 5 planned, and 3 closed programs. Existing programs were located primarily in academic medical centers and served an average of 12.5 spoke sites (range, 1-30). Respondents identified five major barriers, including difficulties in cross-hospital credentialing, integration into established workflows, usability of technology, lack of physician buy-in, and misaligned incentives between patients and providers. Uneven reimbursement was also cited as a barrier, although this was not seen as major because most programs were able to operate independent of reimbursement, and many were not actively seeking reimbursement even when allowed. Critical success factors included selecting spoke hospitals based on receptivity rather than perceived need and cultivating clinical champions at local sites. CONCLUSIONS: Although pediatric emergency telemedicine confronts many of the same challenges of other telemedicine applications, reimbursement is relatively less significant, and workflow disruption are relatively more significant in this setting. Although certain challenges such as credentialing can be addressed with available policy options, others such as the culture of transfer at rural emergency departments require innovative approaches.
Authors: Richard A Orr; Kathryn A Felmet; Yong Han; Karin A McCloskey; Michelle A Dragotta; Debra M Bills; Bradley A Kuch; R Scott Watson Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: James P Marcin; Donald E Schepps; Kimberly A Page; Steven N Struve; Eule Nagrampa; Robert J Dimand Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: James P Marcin; Thomas S Nesbitt; Harry J Kallas; Steven N Struve; Craig A Traugott; Robert J Dimand Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Joseph A Carcillo; Bradley A Kuch; Yong Y Han; Susan Day; Bruce M Greenwald; Karen A McCloskey; Anthony L Pearson-Shaver; Richard A Orr Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2009-07-27 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Stefanie G Ames; Billie S Davis; Jennifer R Marin; Ericka L Fink; Lenora M Olson; Marianne Gausche-Hill; Jeremy M Kahn Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Hadley S Sauers-Ford; Michelle Y Hamline; Melissa M Gosdin; Laura R Kair; Gary M Weinberg; James P Marcin; Jennifer L Rosenthal Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Julia Driessen; Woody Chang; Palak Patel; Rollin M Wright; Kambria Ernst; Steven M Handler Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2018-01-02 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Kori S Zachrison; Emily M Hayden; Krislyn M Boggs; Tehnaz P Boyle; Jingya Gao; Margaret E Samuels-Kalow; James P Marcin; Carlos A Camargo Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-06-20 Impact factor: 7.076
Authors: Kristin N Ray; Laura Ellen Ashcraft; Ateev Mehrotra; Elizabeth Miller; Jeremy M Kahn Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Jennifer L Rosenthal; Hadley S Sauers-Ford; Moina Snyder; Michelle Y Hamline; Angela S Benton; Sharon Joo; JoAnne E Natale; Jennifer L Plant Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Lieneke Fm Ariens; Florine Ml Schussler-Raymakers; Cynthia Frima; Annebeth Flinterman; Eefje Hamminga; Bernd Wm Arents; Carla Afm Bruijnzeel-Koomen; Marjolein S de Bruin-Weller; Harmieke van Os-Medendorp Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-09-05 Impact factor: 5.428