Kirk H Waibel1. 1. Allergy Service, Division of Medicine, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Landstuhl, Germany. Electronic address: Kirk.h.waibel.mil.@mail.mil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Telehealth continues to advance as a health care modality; however, reported experience for synchronous TeleAllergy is limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine the percentage of new and follow-up visits conducted via TeleAllergy in a hospital-based clinic. METHODS: A retrospective study evaluating the first 2 years of a synchronous patient-to-allergist TeleAllergy platform. RESULTS: A total of 112 synchronous TeleAllergy encounters were conducted from January 2014 through December 2015; 66 (59%) of these were new consultations. The mean (SD) age was 26.9 (15.3) years, and 54% of the participants were female. Food allergy (30%), allergic rhinitis (20%), and urticaria (16%) represented the top 3 consultation reasons. Sixteen of 66 patients (24.2%) and 3 of 46 patients (6.5%) attending new and follow-up TeleAllergy visits, respectively, were recommended for an in-person appointment (P = .02). No difference was found between new and follow-up TeleAllergy visits regarding subsequent telephone communication (41% vs 26%, P = .11) or prescriptions ordered (50% vs 33%, P = .08). New TeleAllergy visits were more likely to have more than 1 laboratory test ordered (45% vs 17%, P = .002). On the basis of patient location, the 112 TeleAllergy visits resulted in an estimated savings of 200 workdays or schooldays, US$58,000 in travel-related costs, and 80,000 kilometers not driven. CONCLUSION: Both new and follow-up visits to the allergist/immunologist were well received by patients and demonstrated significant indirect cost savings, with less than one fourth of the patients recommended for an in-person visit. This appears to be the first systematic assessment of TeleAllergy for new and follow-up patient encounters in a clinic-based allergy/immunology practice. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND: Telehealth continues to advance as a health care modality; however, reported experience for synchronous TeleAllergy is limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine the percentage of new and follow-up visits conducted via TeleAllergy in a hospital-based clinic. METHODS: A retrospective study evaluating the first 2 years of a synchronous patient-to-allergist TeleAllergy platform. RESULTS: A total of 112 synchronous TeleAllergy encounters were conducted from January 2014 through December 2015; 66 (59%) of these were new consultations. The mean (SD) age was 26.9 (15.3) years, and 54% of the participants were female. Food allergy (30%), allergic rhinitis (20%), and urticaria (16%) represented the top 3 consultation reasons. Sixteen of 66 patients (24.2%) and 3 of 46 patients (6.5%) attending new and follow-up TeleAllergy visits, respectively, were recommended for an in-person appointment (P = .02). No difference was found between new and follow-up TeleAllergy visits regarding subsequent telephone communication (41% vs 26%, P = .11) or prescriptions ordered (50% vs 33%, P = .08). New TeleAllergy visits were more likely to have more than 1 laboratory test ordered (45% vs 17%, P = .002). On the basis of patient location, the 112 TeleAllergy visits resulted in an estimated savings of 200 workdays or schooldays, US$58,000 in travel-related costs, and 80,000 kilometers not driven. CONCLUSION: Both new and follow-up visits to the allergist/immunologist were well received by patients and demonstrated significant indirect cost savings, with less than one fourth of the patients recommended for an in-person visit. This appears to be the first systematic assessment of TeleAllergy for new and follow-up patient encounters in a clinic-based allergy/immunology practice. Published by Elsevier Inc.