Patient-related barriers to some virtual healthcare services among cancer patients in the USA: a population-based study

Development and Preliminary Validation of a Screener for Digital Health Readiness

Importance

While telehealth use has grown, patient uptake is variable, which has the potential to increase health disparities. Identifying and understanding individuals' barriers to digital health readiness can help health systems efficiently deploy resources to provide personalized patient-centered support.

Objective

To develop and validate an instrument to evaluate digital health readiness to identify and quantify barriers to digital readiness.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this qualitative mixed-methods study conducted from April 26, 2022, to June 8, 2023, the instrument was created in 4 phases. Patients and health care professionals were interviewed to explore barriers to telehealth use, scale items were developed for the screener, cognitive interviews were conducted to refine scale items, and psychometric properties of the screener were evaluated. The study was conducted in an urban, multisite academic health system and the surrounding community. Participants were older than 18 years, English-speaking, and able to provide informed consent. Professionals worked within the Jefferson Health system and were involved in telehealth services.

Exposure

Participants completed a semistructured interview (duration: 6-19 minutes), a cognitive interview (duration: 13-137 minutes), or the draft screener survey (duration: 5-10 minutes).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Development and validation of a screener for digital health readiness.

Results

Of 519 patients approached, 19 were ineligible, 122 declined, and 11 were excluded from analysis, resulting in inclusion of 367 participants (32 patient interviews, 16 professional interviews, 15 cognitive interviews, 304 psychometric survey testing). All 16 professionals who were approached participated. Most patient participants were Black (46.7%) or White (37.9%), male (56.4%), and had a high school degree or some college (49.6%); mean (SD) age was 45 (23) years for participants in cognitive interviews, 53 (18) years for survey respondents, and 57 (14) years for patient interviews. The structured interviews uncovered 21 concepts, leading to 48 items that were refined through cognitive interviews. Psychometric analyses of the 29 items that emerged from the cognitive interviews resulted in a final screener with 24 items across 2 factors: technical readiness (18 items; factor loading range, 0.488-0.968) and quality-of-care concerns (6 items; factor loading range, 0.619-0.942).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this qualitative study of digital health readiness, the findings suggest that the screener items may be valid to assess the complexity of factors influencing digital health uptake and highlight several areas for potential intervention.

The influence of COVID-19 on health seeking behaviors among students attending a minority-serving institution in the U.S

Objective: The goal of this research was to examine the effects of COVID-19 on health seeking behaviors among students attending a minority-serving institution (MSI). Participants: Students [N = 580, Mage (SD) = 27.7 ± 9.1 years] from a midsized university in the U.S. Methods: Cross-sectional survey, distributed between February-March 2021, assessing visits with a healthcare professional before and during the pandemic. Comparison by time and between groups using McNemar's test and ordinal logistic regression. Results: In-person medical care decreased during the pandemic (p = 0.096). Higher frequency of doctor visits pre-pandemic resulted in less contact with students' healthcare providers during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Those that indicated their health status as Excellent were mostly likely to visit their healthcare provider in-person during the pandemic (p = 0.026). Virtual contacts with their healthcare provider increased during the pandemic (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed health seeking behaviors among students attending an MSI.

Racial Differences in Patient-Reported Access to Telehealth: An Important and Unmeasured Social Determinant of Health

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic expanded opportunities for remote oncology telehealth visits. However, reliable internet connectivity, digital literacy, and patient comfort with virtual medical visits may differ among patients, especially socially disadvantaged groups. The primary aim of this study was to identify barriers that might limit access to telehealth video services.

METHODS

First, retrospective analysis was performed of composite administrative data of all patient visits to a large regional cancer center during the pandemic (March 2020 to April 2022). Second, a prospective, cross-sectional study was conducted of patients with known or suspected malignancy over a 6-month period (November 2021 to April 2022). A survey regarding video telehealth accessibility was verbally administered to patients at their clinic visit.

RESULTS

Administrative data demonstrated that although Black patients comprised 43% (n = 9,021) of all patient visits (n = 20,953), the proportion of telehealth visits conducted among Black patients was significantly lower compared with White patients (29% v 71%; P < .0001). Of the prospective, cross-sectional study cohort (n = 148), 51.4% of patients (n = 76) were Black, 38.5% (n = 57) resided in a rural county, and 8.1% (n = 12) were Medicaid-insured. Black participants were more likely to self-report lack of internet access (73.7% v 90.4%; P < .01) and were less likely to report having access to or actively using a patient portal (29.0% v 47.2%; P < .001) compared with White patients. The independent association of race and internet access (P < .05) and patient portal use (P = .001) persisted after multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Black patients disproportionately underparticipated in telehealth visits, suggesting underlying structural disparities in access to digital care. A greater proportion of Black participants self-reported lack of internet access and access to a patient portal compared with White patients. Ensuring equal internet access and digital literacy will be critical to reduce disparities in cancer care among racial minorities.

Geographic Disparities in Access to Cancer Clinical Trials in Canada

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate geographic disparities in access to cancer clinical trials across Canada.

METHODS

Cancer clinical trial data recorded within the clinicaltrials.gov and reporting the conduct of any of these trials in Canada, 2005 to 2023 were reviewed. Frequency analyses of the number of clinical trials that were registered on clinicaltrials.gov for Canada, individual Canadian provinces, main Canadian urban centers, and different cancer types, according to the funding source (industry versus non-industry), as well as according to different periods (using 3-y intervals) were conducted. Moreover, a comparison of cancer clinical trials per 10,000 persons was done between Canada and the United States.

RESULTS

The number of cancer clinical trials per 10,000 individuals (according to the 2021 census) in each province/territory varied between 6.79 (New Brunswick) to 0 (the 3 territories). The number of cancer clinical trials in relation to 1000 projected cancer cases for some of the common tumor types in Canada was then reviewed. The highest number was for lymphoma clinical trials (32.85), whereas the lowest number was for bladder cancer clinical trials (7.06). Most of the trials have industry funding (69%). Using 3-year intervals, the highest number of cancer clinical trials was observed from 2014 to 2016 (778 trials), and the lowest number was observed from 2020 to 2022 (633 trials).

CONCLUSIONS

Access to clinical trials in Canada is not equitably distributed, with geographical and primary tumor site disparities. Moreover, access to cancer clinical trials has been negatively impacted during the time of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Virtual care use among older immigrant adults in Ontario, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: A repeated cross-sectional analysis

The critical role of virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic has raised concerns about the widening disparities to access by vulnerable populations including older immigrants. This paper aims to describe virtual care use in older immigrant populations residing in Ontario, Canada. In this population-based, repeated cross-sectional study, we used linked administrative data to describe virtual care and healthcare utilization among immigrants aged 65 years and older before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Visits were identified weekly from January 2018 to March 2021 among various older adult immigrant populations. Among older immigrants, over 75% were high users of virtual care (had two or more virtual visits) during the pandemic. Rates of virtual care use was low (weekly average <2 visits per 1000) prior to the pandemic, but increased for both older adult immigrant and non-immigrant populations. At the start of the pandemic, virtual care use was lower among immigrants compared to non-immigrants (weekly average of 77 vs 86 visits per 1000). As the pandemic progressed, the rates between these groups became similar (80 vs 79 visits per 1000). Virtual care use was consistently lower among immigrants in the family class (75 visits per 1000) compared to the economic (82 visits per 1000) or refugee (89 visits per 1000) classes, and was lower among those who only spoke French (69 visits per 1000) or neither French nor English (73 visits per 1000) compared to those who were fluent in English (81 visits per 1000). This study found that use of virtual care was comparable between older immigrants and non-immigrants overall, though there may have been barriers to access for older immigrants early on in the pandemic. However, within older immigrant populations, immigration category and language ability were consistent differentiators in the rates of virtual care use throughout the pandemic.

The Cost Impact of Telehealth Interventions in Pediatric Surgical Specialties: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Telehealth is a rapidly expanding care modality in the United States. Pediatric surgical patients often require complex care which can incur significant expenses, some of which may be alleviated by telehealth. We performed a systematic review comparing telehealth and in-person visits, and telehealth's impacts on the cost of healthcare across pediatric surgical specialties.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using the following databases: PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus (Elsevier), and CINAHL (EBSCOHost), searched from inception to July 10th, 2022. Studies were included per the following criteria: (1) investigated a telehealth intervention for pediatric surgical care and (2) provided some metric of telehealth cost compared to an in-person visit. Non-English or studies conducted outside of the U.S. were excluded.

RESULTS

Fourteen manuscripts met inclusion criteria and presented data on 7992 visits, including patients with a weighted average age of 7.5 ± 3.5 years. Most (11/14) studies used telehealth in a synchronous, or "real-time" context. Of the studies which calculated dollar cost savings for telehealth visits compared to in-person appointments we found a substantial range of savings per visit, from $48.50 to $344.64. Cost savings were frequently realized in terms of reduced travel expenditures, lower opportunity costs (e.g. lost wages), and decreased hospital labor requirements.

CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that telehealth provides cost incentives to pediatric surgical care in many scenarios, including post-operative visits and some routine clinic visits. Future work should focus on standardizing the metrics by which cost impacts are analyzed and detailing which visits are most appropriately facilitated by telehealth.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

V.

Evaluating Racial/Ethnic Differences in Care Escalation Among COVID-19 Patients in a Home-Based Hospital

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected over 414 million people worldwide with 5.8 million deaths, as of February 2022. Telemedicine-based interventions to expand healthcare systems' capacity and reduce infection risk have rapidly increased during the pandemic, despite concerns regarding equitable access. Atrium Health Hospital at Home (AH-HaH) is a home-based program that provides advanced, hospital-level medical care and monitoring for patients who would otherwise be hospitalized in a traditional setting. Our retrospective cohort study of positive COVID-19 patients who were admitted to AH-HaH aims to investigate whether the rate of care escalation from AH-HaH to traditional hospitalization differed based on patients' racial/ethnic backgrounds. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between care escalation within 14 days from index AH-HaH admission and race/ethnicity. We found approximately one in five patients receiving care for COVID-19 in AH-HaH required care escalation within 14 days. Odds of care escalation were not significantly different for Hispanic or non-Hispanic Blacks compared to non-Hispanic Whites. However, secondary analyses showed that both Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients were younger and with fewer comorbidities than non-Hispanic Whites. The study highlights the need for new care models to vigilantly monitor for disparities, so that timely and tailored adaptations can be implemented for vulnerable populations.

A multi-stakeholder approach is needed to reduce the digital divide and encourage equitable access to telehealth

Since the COVID-19 pandemic onset, there has been exponential growth in the uptake of telehealth, globally. However, evidence suggests that people living in lower socioeconomic areas, cultural and linguistically diverse communities, people with disabilities, and with low health literacy are less likely to receive telehealth services. These population groups have disproportionately higher health needs and face additional barriers to healthcare access. Barriers that reduce access to telehealth further exacerbate existing gaps in care delivery. To improve equity of access to telehealth, we need to reduce the digital divide through a multi-stakeholder approach. This article proposes practical steps to reduce the digital divide and encourage equitable access to telehealth. Enabling more equitable access to telehealth requires improvements in digital health literacy, workforce training in clinical telehealth, co-design of new telehealth-enabled models of care, change management, advocacy for culturally appropriate services, and sustainable funding models.

Exercise oncology during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic: Are virtually supervised exercise interventions a sustainable alternative?

During the COVID-19 pandemic, new challenges are presented in clinical research settings to increase exercise levels, particularly in vulnerable populations such as cancer survivors. While in-person supervised exercise is an effective format to improve patient-reported outcomes and physical function for cancer survivors, the COVID-19 pandemic limited this form of exercise as a feasible option within research and cancer care. As such, exercise oncology interventions were adapted to home-based instruction. In this review, we examine the current evidence of exercise interventions in cancer populations during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. We identified that group-based virtually supervised home-based exercise was the most used format among exercise oncology interventions during the pandemic. Preliminary results support feasibility and effectiveness of this emerging exercise setting in cancer survivors; however, it needs to be further investigated in adequately designed larger trials. Additionally, we provide recommendations and perspective for the implementation of virtually supervised home-based exercise.

Lessons learned: Telemedicine patterns and clinical application in patients with gynecologic cancers during COVID-19

•

Telemedicine use did not differ by age, race, insurance, or hospital proximity.

•

Older patients were more likely to participate in telephone over video visits.

•

88% of patients who attended telemedicine visits also attended in-person visits.

•

Multiple visit types (consult, results, therapy) were conducted via telemedicine.

Objective

To describe the use of telemedicine in gynecologic oncology and identify patient characteristics associated with telemedicine use during COVID-19.

Methods

Single-institution retrospective chart review of patients with gynecologic cancer who participated in in-person and telemedicine visits (video and telephone) from January 2019 to November 2020. Patient characteristics, visit and treatment characteristics were collected. Comparisons between 2019 and 2020 and between in-person and telemedicine visits were performed. Cancer-specific visit details were described.

Results

From January to November 2020, 2,039 patients attended 5240 ambulatory visits in our gynecologic oncology outpatient clinics with 4,304 (82.1%) in-person visits, 512 (9.8%) video telemedicine visits, and 424 (8.1%) telephone visits. In 2020, 936 (45.9%) patients participated in a telemedicine visit. Demographic characteristics did not differ between those who participated in any telemedicine versus in-person visits (p > 0.05). Black patients represented a larger share of telephone visits but this was not significant. Patients aged > 65 years were more likely to use the telephone for a visit and less likely to use video visits compared to their younger counterparts. The majority of patients who attended a telemedicine visit also attended a visit in-person (88.0%). The most common purpose of the telemedicine visits was to discuss results and/or treatment plans (46%) with other appointments occurring for treatment check-ins and clinical trials.

Conclusions

The use of telemedicine drastically increased in 2020. Patient demographics were not different between in-person and telemedicine visits except that older patients were more likely to use telephone visits over video visits. Telemedicine can be used for a variety of care needs in gynecologic oncology but further work needs to be done to optimize implementation, assess cost-effectiveness and patient outcomes.

Future of Teleoncology: Trends and Disparities in Telehealth and Secure Message Utilization in the COVID-19 Era

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic created an imperative to re-examine the role of telehealth in oncology. We studied trends and disparities in utilization of telehealth (video and telephone visits) and secure messaging (SM; ie, e-mail via portal/app), before and during the pandemic.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of hematology/oncology patient visits (telephone/video/office) and SM between January 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020, at Kaiser Permanente Northern California.

RESULTS

Among 334,666 visits and 1,161,239 SM, monthly average office visits decreased from 10,562 prepandemic to 1,769 during pandemic, telephone visits increased from 5,114 to 8,663, and video visits increased from 40 to 4,666. Monthly average SM increased from 50,788 to 64,315 since the pandemic began. Video visits were a significantly higher fraction of all visits (P < .01) in (1) younger patients (Generation Z 48%, Millennials 46%; Generation X 40%; Baby Boomers 34.4%; Silent Generation 24.5%); (2) patients with commercial insurance (39%) compared with Medicaid (32.7%) or Medicare (28.1%); (3) English speakers (33.7%) compared with those requiring an interpreter (24.5%); (4) patients who are Asian (35%) and non-Hispanic White (33.7%) compared with Black (30.1%) and Hispanic White (27.5%); (5) married/domestic partner patients (35%) compared with single/divorced/widowed (29.9%); (6) Charlson comorbidity index ≤ 3 (36.2%) compared with > 3 (31.3%); and (7) males (34.6%) compared with females (32.3%). Similar statistically significant SM utilization patterns were also seen.

CONCLUSION

In the pandemic era, hematology/oncology telehealth and SM use rapidly increased in a manner that is feasible and sustained. Possible disparities existed in video visit and SM use by age, insurance plan, language, race, ethnicity, marital status, comorbidities, and sex.

The Use of Virtual Care in Patients with Hematologic Malignancies: A Scoping Review

There is increasing interest from cancer patients and their healthcare providers in the use of virtual care in routine clinical practice. In the setting of hematologic malignancy, where patients often undergo complex and immunodepleting treatments, understanding how to use virtual care safely and effectively is critically important. We aimed to describe the use of virtual care in patients with hematologic malignancies and to examine physician- and patient-reported outcomes in the form of a systematic scoping review. An electronic search of PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, Scopus, and EBSCO CINAHL was conducted from January 2000 to April 2021. A comprehensive search strategy was used to identify relevant articles, and data were extracted to assess the study design, population, setting, patient characteristics, virtual care platform, and study results. Studies were included if they described the use of virtual care for patients with hematologic malignancies; commentaries were excluded. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria after abstract and full-text review. Three studies found that app-based tools were effective in monitoring patient symptoms and triggering alerts for more urgent follow-up. Four studies described the use of phone-based interventions. Five studies found that videoconferencing, with both physicians and oncology nurses, was highly rated by patients. Emerging themes included high levels of patient satisfaction across all domains of virtual care. Provider satisfaction scores were rated lower than patient scores, with concerns about technical issues leading to challenges with virtual care. Four studies found that virtual care allowed providers to promptly respond to patient concerns, especially when patients were experiencing side-effects or had questions about their treatment. Overall, the use of virtual care in patients with hematologic malignancies appears feasible, and resulted in high patient satisfaction. Further research is needed in order to evaluate the optimal method of integrating virtual care into clinical practice.

HIV care using differentiated service delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide cohort study in the US Department of Veterans Affairs

Introduction

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is the largest provider of HIV care in the United States. Changes in healthcare delivery became necessary with the COVID‐19 pandemic. We compared HIV healthcare delivery during the first year of the COVID‐19 pandemic to a prior similar calendar period.

Methods

We included 27,674 people with HIV (PWH) enrolled in the Veterans Aging Cohort Study prior to 1 March 2019, with ≥1 healthcare encounter from 1 March 2019 to 29 February 2020 (2019) and/or 1 March 2020 to 28 February 2021 (2020). We counted monthly general medicine/infectious disease (GM/ID) clinic visits and HIV‐1 RNA viral load (VL) tests. We determined the percentage with ≥1 clinic visit (in‐person vs. telephone/video [virtual]) and ≥1 VL test (detectable vs. suppressed) for 2019 and 2020. Using pharmacy records, we summarized antiretroviral (ARV) medication refill length (<90 vs. ≥90 days) and monthly ARV coverage.

Results

Most patients had ≥1 GM/ID visit in 2019 (96%) and 2020 (95%). For 2019, 27% of visits were virtual compared to 64% in 2020. In 2019, 82% had VL measured compared to 74% in 2020. Of those with VL measured, 92% and 91% had suppressed VL in 2019 and 2020. ARV refills for ≥90 days increased from 39% in 2019 to 51% in 2020. ARV coverage was similar for all months of 2019 and 2020 ranging from 76% to 80% except for March 2019 (72%). Women were less likely than men to be on ARVs or to have a VL test in both years.

Conclusions

During the COVID‐19 pandemic, the VA increased the use of virtual visits and longer ARV refills, while maintaining a high percentage of patients with suppressed VL among those with VL measured. Despite decreased in‐person services during the pandemic, access to ARVs was not disrupted. More follow‐up time is needed to determine whether overall health was impacted by the use of differentiated service delivery and to evaluate whether a long‐term shift to increased virtual healthcare could be beneficial, particularly for PWH in rural areas or with transportation barriers. Programmes to increase ARV use and VL testing for women are needed.

Digital Literacy at an Urban Cancer Center: Implications for Technology Use and Vulnerable Patients

PURPOSE

eHealth literacy, or the ability to seek, find, understand, and appraise health information from electronic sources, has become increasingly relevant in the era of COVID-19, when so many aspects of patient care became dependent on technology. We aimed to understand eHealth literacy among a diverse sample of patients with cancer and discuss ways for health systems and cancer centers to ensure that all patients have access to high-quality care.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of patients with cancer and caregivers was conducted at an NCI-designated cancer center to assess access to the Internet, smartphone ownership, use of mobile apps, willingness to engage remotely with the health care team, and use of the patient portal. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were used to assess frequencies and significant differences between variables.

RESULTS

Of 363 participants, 55% (n = 201) were female, 71% (n = 241) identified as non-Hispanic White, and 29% (n = 85) reported that their highest level of education was a high school diploma. Most (90%, n = 323) reported having access to the Internet and most (82%, n = 283) reported owning a smartphone. Younger patients or those with a college degree were significantly more likely to own a smartphone, access health information online, know how to download an app on their own, have an interest in communicating with their health care team remotely, or have an account on the electronic patient portal.

CONCLUSION

As cancer centers increasingly engage patients through electronic and mobile applications, patients with low or limited digital literacy may be excluded, exacerbating current cancer health disparities. Patient-, provider- and system-level technology barriers must be understood and mitigated.

Hospitalizations among early-stage colon cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy: a real-world study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the patterns of hospitalizations among early-stage colon cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy and to identify high-risk groups that may benefit from more careful monitoring in a real-world, population-based context.

METHODS

This is a population-based study using linked administrative databases from the province of Alberta, Canada. Any events of hospitalization among patients with non-metastatic colon cancer undergoing upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy were reviewed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine factors associated with risk of hospitalization, and the impact of hospitalization on overall survival was assessed through Kaplan-Meier estimates and Multivariable Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 2257 patients were considered eligible and were included in the current analysis, including 483 patients (21.4%) who were hospitalized within 6 months of the start of adjuvant chemotherapy, and 1774 patients (78.6%) who were not. The following factors were associated with a higher hospitalization risk: older age (OR: 1.02; 95% CI 1.01-1.03), higher comorbidity (OR: 1.48; 95% CI 1.31-1.67), women (OR for men versus women: 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.98), living in the North zone (OR for Edmonton zone versus North zone: 0.60; 95% CI 0.42-0.87), and CAPOX chemotherapy (OR for CAPOX versus FOLFOX: 1.50; 95% CI 1.12-2.00). Patients with a history of hospitalization during adjuvant chemotherapy had a worse overall survival compared to patients who were not hospitalized (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this study, one out of five colon cancer patients were hospitalized during adjuvant chemotherapy. Older individuals, women, those with higher comorbidity, and those receiving adjuvant CAPOX were more likely to be hospitalized.