Cargando…
Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care
BACKGROUND: The use of chat-based digital visits (eVisits) to assess infectious symptoms in primary care is rapidly increasing. The “digi-physical” model of care uses eVisits as the first line of assessment while assuming a certain proportion of patients will inevitably need to be further assessed t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8753946/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35036998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-021-01618-2 |
_version_ | 1784632177150918656 |
---|---|
author | Entezarjou, Artin Sjöbeck, Maria Midlöv, Patrik Nymberg, Veronica Milos Vigren, Lina Labaf, Ashkan Jakobsson, Ulf Calling, Susanna |
author_facet | Entezarjou, Artin Sjöbeck, Maria Midlöv, Patrik Nymberg, Veronica Milos Vigren, Lina Labaf, Ashkan Jakobsson, Ulf Calling, Susanna |
author_sort | Entezarjou, Artin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The use of chat-based digital visits (eVisits) to assess infectious symptoms in primary care is rapidly increasing. The “digi-physical” model of care uses eVisits as the first line of assessment while assuming a certain proportion of patients will inevitably need to be further assessed through urgent physical examination within 48 h. It is unclear to what extent this approach can mitigate physical visits compared to assessing patients directly using office visits. METHODS: This pre-COVID-19-pandemic observational study followed up “digi-physical” eVisit patients (n = 1188) compared to office visit patients (n = 599) with respiratory or urinary symptoms. Index visits occurred between March 30th 2016 and March 29th 2019. The primary outcome was subsequent physical visits to physicians within two weeks using registry data from Skåne county, Sweden (Region Skånes Vårddatabas, RSVD). RESULTS: No significant differences in subsequent physical visits within two weeks (excluding the first 48 h) were noted following “digi-physical” care compared to office visits (179 (18.0%) vs. 102 (17.6%), P = .854). As part of the “digital-physical” concept, a significantly larger proportion of eVisit patients had a physical visit within 48 h compared to corresponding office visit patients (191 (16.1%) vs. 19 (3.2%), P < .001), with 150 (78.5%) of these eVisit patients recommended some form of follow-up by the eVisit physician. CONCLUSIONS: Most eVisit patients (68.9%) with respiratory and urinary symptoms have no subsequent physical visits. Beyond an unavoidable portion of patients requiring urgent physical examination within 48 h, “digi-physical” management of respiratory and urinary symptoms results in comparable subsequent health care utilization compared to office visits. eVisit providers may need to optimize use of resources to minimize the proportion of patients being assessed both digitally and physically within 48 h as part of the “digi-physical” concept. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03474887. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01618-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8753946 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87539462022-01-12 Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care Entezarjou, Artin Sjöbeck, Maria Midlöv, Patrik Nymberg, Veronica Milos Vigren, Lina Labaf, Ashkan Jakobsson, Ulf Calling, Susanna BMC Prim Care Research BACKGROUND: The use of chat-based digital visits (eVisits) to assess infectious symptoms in primary care is rapidly increasing. The “digi-physical” model of care uses eVisits as the first line of assessment while assuming a certain proportion of patients will inevitably need to be further assessed through urgent physical examination within 48 h. It is unclear to what extent this approach can mitigate physical visits compared to assessing patients directly using office visits. METHODS: This pre-COVID-19-pandemic observational study followed up “digi-physical” eVisit patients (n = 1188) compared to office visit patients (n = 599) with respiratory or urinary symptoms. Index visits occurred between March 30th 2016 and March 29th 2019. The primary outcome was subsequent physical visits to physicians within two weeks using registry data from Skåne county, Sweden (Region Skånes Vårddatabas, RSVD). RESULTS: No significant differences in subsequent physical visits within two weeks (excluding the first 48 h) were noted following “digi-physical” care compared to office visits (179 (18.0%) vs. 102 (17.6%), P = .854). As part of the “digital-physical” concept, a significantly larger proportion of eVisit patients had a physical visit within 48 h compared to corresponding office visit patients (191 (16.1%) vs. 19 (3.2%), P < .001), with 150 (78.5%) of these eVisit patients recommended some form of follow-up by the eVisit physician. CONCLUSIONS: Most eVisit patients (68.9%) with respiratory and urinary symptoms have no subsequent physical visits. Beyond an unavoidable portion of patients requiring urgent physical examination within 48 h, “digi-physical” management of respiratory and urinary symptoms results in comparable subsequent health care utilization compared to office visits. eVisit providers may need to optimize use of resources to minimize the proportion of patients being assessed both digitally and physically within 48 h as part of the “digi-physical” concept. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03474887. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01618-2. BioMed Central 2022-01-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8753946/ /pubmed/35036998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-021-01618-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Entezarjou, Artin Sjöbeck, Maria Midlöv, Patrik Nymberg, Veronica Milos Vigren, Lina Labaf, Ashkan Jakobsson, Ulf Calling, Susanna Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care |
title | Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care |
title_full | Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care |
title_fullStr | Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care |
title_full_unstemmed | Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care |
title_short | Health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care |
title_sort | health care utilization following “digi-physical” assessment compared to physical assessment for infectious symptoms in primary care |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8753946/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35036998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-021-01618-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT entezarjouartin healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare AT sjobeckmaria healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare AT midlovpatrik healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare AT nymbergveronicamilos healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare AT vigrenlina healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare AT labafashkan healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare AT jakobssonulf healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare AT callingsusanna healthcareutilizationfollowingdigiphysicalassessmentcomparedtophysicalassessmentforinfectioussymptomsinprimarycare |