Katie W Russell1, Jeffrey R Saffle2, Louanna Theurer3, Amalia L Cochran4. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, SOM 3B110, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, SOM 3B110, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA; Department of Telemedicine, University of Utah Health Care, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 3. Department of Telemedicine, University of Utah Health Care, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, University of Utah, 30 North 1900 East, SOM 3B110, Salt Lake City, UT 84132, USA. Electronic address: amalia.cochran@hsc.utah.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many Americans have limited access to specialty burn care, and telemedicine has been proposed as a means to address this disparity. However, many telemedicine programs have been founded on grant support and then fail once the grant support expires. Our objective was to demonstrate that a burn telemedicine program can be financially viable. METHODS: This retrospective review from 2005 to 2014 evaluated burn telemedicine visits and financial reimbursement during and after a Technology Opportunities Program grant to a regional burn center. RESULTS: In 2005, we had 12 telemedicine visits, which increased to 458 in 2014. In terms of how this compares to in-person clinic visits, we saw a consistent increase in telemedicine visits as a percentage of total clinic visits from .26% in 2005 to 14% in 2014. Median telemedicine reimbursement has been equivalent to in-person visits. CONCLUSIONS: Specialty telemedicine programs can successfully transition from grant-funded enterprises to self-sustaining. The availability of telemedicine services allows access to specialty expertise in a large and sparsely populated region without imposing an undue financial burden.
BACKGROUND: Many Americans have limited access to specialty burn care, and telemedicine has been proposed as a means to address this disparity. However, many telemedicine programs have been founded on grant support and then fail once the grant support expires. Our objective was to demonstrate that a burn telemedicine program can be financially viable. METHODS: This retrospective review from 2005 to 2014 evaluated burn telemedicine visits and financial reimbursement during and after a Technology Opportunities Program grant to a regional burn center. RESULTS: In 2005, we had 12 telemedicine visits, which increased to 458 in 2014. In terms of how this compares to in-person clinic visits, we saw a consistent increase in telemedicine visits as a percentage of total clinic visits from .26% in 2005 to 14% in 2014. Median telemedicine reimbursement has been equivalent to in-person visits. CONCLUSIONS: Specialty telemedicine programs can successfully transition from grant-funded enterprises to self-sustaining. The availability of telemedicine services allows access to specialty expertise in a large and sparsely populated region without imposing an undue financial burden.