Neelkamal Soares1, Joseph Dewalle2, Ben Marsh3. 1. Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, MI, USA. 2. Environmental Health Institute, Center for Health Research, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA, USA. 3. Department of Geography and Program in Environmental Studies, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To understand potential utilization of clinical services at a rural integrated health care system by generating optimal groups of telemedicine locations from electronic health record (EHR) data using geographic information systems (GISs). METHODS: This retrospective study extracted nonidentifiable grouped data of patients over a 2-year period from the EHR, including geomasked locations. Spatially optimal groupings were created using available telemedicine sites by calculating patients' average travel distance (ATD) to the closest clinic site. RESULTS: A total of 4027 visits by 2049 unique patients were analyzed. The best travel distances for site groupings of 3, 4, 5, or 6 site locations were ranked based on increasing ATD. Each one-site increase in the number of available telemedicine sites decreased minimum ATD by about 8%. For a given group size, the best groupings were very similar in minimum travel distance. There were significant differences in predicted patient load imbalance between otherwise similar groupings. A majority of the best site groupings used the same small number of sites, and urban sites were heavily used. DISCUSSION: With EHR geospatial data at an individual patient level, we can model potential telemedicine sites for specialty access in a rural geographic area. Relatively few sites could serve most of the population. Direct access to patient GIS data from an EHR provides direct knowledge of the client base compared to methods that allocate aggregated data. CONCLUSION: Geospatial data and methods can assist health care location planning, generating data about load, load balance, and spatial accessibility.
OBJECTIVE: To understand potential utilization of clinical services at a rural integrated health care system by generating optimal groups of telemedicine locations from electronic health record (EHR) data using geographic information systems (GISs). METHODS: This retrospective study extracted nonidentifiable grouped data of patients over a 2-year period from the EHR, including geomasked locations. Spatially optimal groupings were created using available telemedicine sites by calculating patients' average travel distance (ATD) to the closest clinic site. RESULTS: A total of 4027 visits by 2049 unique patients were analyzed. The best travel distances for site groupings of 3, 4, 5, or 6 site locations were ranked based on increasing ATD. Each one-site increase in the number of available telemedicine sites decreased minimum ATD by about 8%. For a given group size, the best groupings were very similar in minimum travel distance. There were significant differences in predicted patient load imbalance between otherwise similar groupings. A majority of the best site groupings used the same small number of sites, and urban sites were heavily used. DISCUSSION: With EHR geospatial data at an individual patient level, we can model potential telemedicine sites for specialty access in a rural geographic area. Relatively few sites could serve most of the population. Direct access to patient GIS data from an EHR provides direct knowledge of the client base compared to methods that allocate aggregated data. CONCLUSION: Geospatial data and methods can assist health care location planning, generating data about load, load balance, and spatial accessibility.
Authors: Leah K VanWey; Ronald R Rindfuss; Myron P Gutmann; Barbara Entwisle; Deborah L Balk Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2005-10-17 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Brian S Schwartz; Walter F Stewart; Sarah Godby; Jonathan Pollak; Joseph Dewalle; Sharon Larson; Dione G Mercer; Thomas A Glass Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Robyn A Clark; Andrea Driscoll; Justin Nottage; Skye McLennan; David M Coombe; Errol J Bamford; David Wilkinson; Simon Stewart Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2007-02-19 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Michael J Denney; Dustin M Long; Matthew G Armistead; Jamie L Anderson; Baqiyyah N Conway Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2016-07-29 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Liliana Laranjo; David Rodrigues; Ana Marta Pereira; Rogério T Ribeiro; José Manuel Boavida Journal: JMIR Public Health Surveill Date: 2016-03-17
Authors: Mikko Pyykönen; Miika Linna; Markku Tykkyläinen; Eric Delmelle; Tiina Laatikainen Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2021-12-03 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Heather Angier; Elizabeth A Jacobs; Nathalie Huguet; Sonja Likumahuwa-Ackman; Stephanie Robert; Jennifer E DeVoe Journal: Fam Med Community Health Date: 2018-12-06