Eric K Kim1, Joseph Kidane1, Shauna Brodie2, Delphine S Tuot3,4, Jeffrey D Sharon2. 1. School of Medicine University of California San Francisco San Francisco California USA. 2. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery University of California San Francisco San Francisco California USA. 3. Division of Nephrology University of California San Francisco San Francisco California USA. 4. Center for Vulnerable Populations at Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital University of California, San Francisco San Francisco California USA.
Abstract
Objective: During COVID-19, otolaryngology clinics rapidly implemented telehealth programs in accordance with social distancing guidelines and institutional policies. Our objectives are to evaluate the usefulness of telephone audio visits for underserved patients seeking otolaryngological care at an urban safety-net hospital and identify patient factors associated with telephone visit attendance. Methods: In a retrospective review of all adult telephone visits in 2020, we compared the demographics and visit characteristics of patients who attended telehealth versus in-person visits and patients who attended versus missed telehealth visits. Univariable and multivariable regressions were utilized to identify predictors of missing telehealth visits. Results: We identified 318 telehealth encounters completed by 254 patients (72.8% were of racial/ethnic minority; 76.3% had low-income, need-based insurances; 43.7% had limited English proficiency). The most common chief complaints were related to head and neck oncology (n = 85, 26.7%), otology/neurotology (n = 74, 23.3%), and general otolaryngology (n = 69, 21.7%). The following actions were executed during telephone visits: behavioral and/or medication patient education (n = 152, 47.8%); sharing testing/imaging/tumor board results (n = 125, 39.3%); referrals to another department (n = 103, 32.4%); rendering a new diagnosis (n = 98, 30.8%); changing medications (n = 60, 18.9%). Less than half of telephone visits (46.2%) resulted in in-person follow-up, most commonly for in-person exams. The distribution of race/ethnicity differed between attended in-person appointments versus telephone visits (p = .01), but race and ethnicity were not significant predictors of telephone visit attendance. Conclusion: Despite limited diagnostic capabilities, telephone audio visits can be an effective and accessible tool for providing continuity and advancing care in socially disadvantaged patients. Level of evidence: IV.
Objective: During COVID-19, otolaryngology clinics rapidly implemented telehealth programs in accordance with social distancing guidelines and institutional policies. Our objectives are to evaluate the usefulness of telephone audio visits for underserved patients seeking otolaryngological care at an urban safety-net hospital and identify patient factors associated with telephone visit attendance. Methods: In a retrospective review of all adult telephone visits in 2020, we compared the demographics and visit characteristics of patients who attended telehealth versus in-person visits and patients who attended versus missed telehealth visits. Univariable and multivariable regressions were utilized to identify predictors of missing telehealth visits. Results: We identified 318 telehealth encounters completed by 254 patients (72.8% were of racial/ethnic minority; 76.3% had low-income, need-based insurances; 43.7% had limited English proficiency). The most common chief complaints were related to head and neck oncology (n = 85, 26.7%), otology/neurotology (n = 74, 23.3%), and general otolaryngology (n = 69, 21.7%). The following actions were executed during telephone visits: behavioral and/or medication patient education (n = 152, 47.8%); sharing testing/imaging/tumor board results (n = 125, 39.3%); referrals to another department (n = 103, 32.4%); rendering a new diagnosis (n = 98, 30.8%); changing medications (n = 60, 18.9%). Less than half of telephone visits (46.2%) resulted in in-person follow-up, most commonly for in-person exams. The distribution of race/ethnicity differed between attended in-person appointments versus telephone visits (p = .01), but race and ethnicity were not significant predictors of telephone visit attendance. Conclusion: Despite limited diagnostic capabilities, telephone audio visits can be an effective and accessible tool for providing continuity and advancing care in socially disadvantaged patients. Level of evidence: IV.
Authors: Alexander Bell; Peter E Lonergan; Domenique Escobar; Mary Fakunle; Carissa E Chu; Sara Berdy; Nynikka R Palmer; Benjamin N Breyer; Samuel L Washington Journal: Urology Date: 2021-08-27 Impact factor: 2.633
Authors: Scott B Shapiro; Noga Lipschitz; Nathan Kemper; Mario Zuccarello; Joseph T Breen; Myles L Pensak; Ravi N Samy Journal: Otol Neurotol Date: 2020-10 Impact factor: 2.311
Authors: Jonathan R Mallen; Manan Udayan Shah; Ryan Drake; Kathryn Kreicher; Todd Falcone; Nicholas Karter; Scott Schoem; Christopher Grindle; Stephen Wolfe; Chia-Ling Kuo; Jinjian Mu; Seth Lotterman; Gregory Bonaiuto Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Jacob A Clarke; Alyssa M Despotis; Ricardo J Ramirez; Jose P Zevallos; Angela L Mazul Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-07-29 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Amrita Mukherjee; Adeniyi J Idigo; Yuanfan Ye; Howard W Wiener; Ravi Paluri; Lisle M Nabell; Sadeep Shrestha Journal: Health Equity Date: 2020-03-24