We developed and implemented the Access to Telehealth Needs Assessment Survey (AcTNAS) based on Five A's of TelEquity (Awareness-Application, Agency, Attitude, Accessibility, and Accommodation) that we created.

We iteratively developed the AcTNAS in English (mid 2021-early 2022) and transcreated (culturally and linguistically adapted) it into languages spoken in the service area. Women with breast cancer in safety net hospital and academic medical center cancer clinics in New York City completed the AcTNAS.

Participants (N = 441) self-identified as foreign-born (77 %, n = 338), Black (56 %, n = 222), and Hispanic (36 %, n = 158). Most preferred speaking English (69 %, n = 306) or Spanish (27 %, n = 118). The AcTNAS assessed telehealth Awareness-Application (21 % did not know about the patient portal; 57 % had never participated in video telehealth), Agency (52 % were "not good with technology"), Attitude (voice-only [57 %] and video [51 %] appointments not as good as in-person appointments), Accessibility (38 % without good telephone service, 8 % no Wi-Fi/plug-in/public internet access), and Accommodation (50 % needed telehealth connection assistance). Insurance status (p ≤ .009) was associated with a prior televisit. Age (p < .001), education (p < .001), region of origin (p = .001), ethnicity (p = .028), and language (p < .001), were associated with prior portal usage.

AcTNAS administration helped identify telehealth access needs among underserved patients with cancer.

While the digitalization of healthcare and the advent of consumer-centered technologies have led to advancements in patient engagement, it is evident that certain, underprivileged segments of society might not be benefiting. The purpose of this review was to thus analyze the expanding data focusing on digital disparities in healthcare and was designed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. First, a literature search of original, peer-reviewed publications was undertaken to identify studies pertaining to disparities in the utilization of digital technologies in healthcare using a variety of customized retrieval terms. Articles published from January 2014 to January 2024 were included. Subsequently, a total of 247 peer-reviewed studies were identified which were used to construct a framework for interpretation. The core themes could broadly be categorized into digital health portals (N = 74), telemedicine (N = 57), healthcare wearables (N = 49), digital intervention tools (N = 35), and virtual education (N = 32). While the potential of digital health to fundamentally transform the nature of patient-centric care is increasingly being recognized, the growing "digital divide" between the "haves" and "have-nots" with respect to nearly every facet of technology implementation raises concern regarding the perpetuation of inequities across society.

Fetal echocardiography is the mainstay of prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart disease. The COVID-19 pandemic led to shifts in triage of prenatal services. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on prenatal diagnosis, surgical outcomes, and disparities in neonatal critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) management in the United States during the pandemic's first year.

A multi-institutional retrospective cohort study compared neonatal CCHD outcomes (requiring surgery within 60 days of birth) 1 year prior (prepandemic era) and during the peak pandemic era, supplemented by a Fetal Heart Society survey assessing regional practice changes. Data on prenatal diagnosis, demographics, outcomes, and 2020 state Area Deprivation Index were analyzed using Wilcoxon rank sum and χ2 tests. The survey, completed by 72 fetal cardiologists from 9 US census regions, showed 75% of institutions implemented restrictions by March 2020, affecting triage, referrals, and number of prenatal cardiology visits. Compared with CCHD neonates born prepandemic (n=4637), those born during the pandemic (n=1806) had a higher proportion of prenatal diagnosis (66% versus 63%, P<0.05). There were no significant differences in complications or mortality, but pandemic-era neonates had longer hospital stays. During the pandemic, CCHD neonates had a more disadvantaged Area Deprivation Index and had surgery at hospitals located in more advantaged regions.

Although pandemic-driven care delivery adjustments affected perinatal cardiology referrals and triage, prenatal diagnosis, perioperative outcomes, and survival remained robust. The management of CCHD demonstrates health care resilience, maintaining core prenatal and perioperative care. Regional variations highlight the need for targeted strategies to address disparities during health care crises.

Digital health technologies include patient portals, telehealth, mobile health, and web-based resources; they have the potential to expand health care access, increase quality of care, and improve health outcomes. An emerging literature describes factors associated with disparities between Spanish and English speakers with the use of digital health tools and documents.

To characterize barriers and facilitators and to inform hypothesis-generating questions and intervention planning associated with digital health technology use among Spanish-speaking populations in the US.

Between January 2023 and April 2024, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for publications between January 2013 and April 2024. Systematic reviews, protocols, editorials, abstracts, unpublished literature, non-peer-reviewed literature, and non-US-based and non-English studies were excluded. The Covidence platform was used to avoid duplicate records, and an abstract and full-text screening were then conducted for exclusions. Unstructured text in the final dataset was thematically analyzed.

Of 688 publications searched, 192 were excluded as duplications, 277 were excluded from abstract screenings, and 113 were excluded from full-text screenings. Among the 106 included studies (68% of which were published between 2019 and 2024), 73 (69%) used quantitative methods, 15 (14%) used qualitative methods, and 18 (17%) used applied mixed methods. The primary technologies studied were characterized as portal (21% [n = 22]), telehealth (42% [n = 45]), mobile health (16% [n = 17]), web-based resources (9% [n = 10]), and mixed (studies reporting >1 technology; 11% [n = 12]). Compared with English speakers, studies revealed consistently lower portal account activation, portal use, telehealth adoption, and online resource use among Spanish speakers. Barriers to use across all technologies included limited access to technology and Wi-Fi, low literacy, and limited digital literacy. Barriers to portal and telehealth use included lack of awareness of digital tools, limited patient-facing instructions in Spanish, and interpreter-related challenges. Facilitators cited across multiple technologies included use of text messaging and social media interventions, interventions involving care partners and/or interpreters, and culturally and linguistically tailored Spanish materials.

The results of this scoping review suggest that Spanish-speaking persons in the US faced technology, language, and literacy-related barriers to digital technology use. Embracing support for care partners, facilitating text message or social media-oriented workflows, and ensuring that materials are linguistically and culturally tailored represent approaches for health systems, electronic health record vendors, and community health organizations to mitigate these disparities.

BackgroundVirtual care expanded rapidly during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how this shift affected healthcare disparities among subgroups of patients is of concern. Racial and ethnic minorities, older adults, individuals with less education, and lower-income households have lower rates of home broadband, smartphone ownership, and patient portal adoption, which may directly affect access to virtual care. Because primary care is a major access point to healthcare, perspectives of primary care providers are critical to inform the implementation of equitable virtual care.ObjectiveThe aim of this mixed methods study was to explore primary care physician experiences and perceptions of barriers and facilitators to equitable virtual care.DesignWe used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design, which consists of first collecting and analyzing quantitative survey data, then using those results to inform a qualitative follow-up phase to explain and expand on results.ParticipantsPrimary care physicians in a family medicine department at an academic medical center responded to surveys (n = 38) and participated in interviews (n = 16).ApproachParticipants completed a survey concerning frequency and preferences about video visits, pros and cons of video visits, communication aspects, and sufficiency of the technology. A purposeful sample of participants completed semi-structured interviews about their virtual care experiences with a focus on equity for subpopulations.Key ResultsThe results indicated that physicians have observed equity issues for unique patient populations. The results add to the understanding of nuanced ways in which virtual care can increase and decrease healthcare access for unique populations. Patients with limited English proficiency were particularly affected by inequity in virtual care access.ConclusionAdditional research and interventions are needed to improve portal access for those with limited English proficiency. Improvements should focus on health system interventions that expand access without requiring increased patient burden.

Introduction: This research examines the characteristics associated with the use of remote consultations in general practice in Ireland during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The analysis uses three waves of a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of health in Ireland ("Healthy Ireland" survey), relating to the years 2020/2021, 2021/2022, and 2022/2023. The sample includes people aged 15 and over who reported seeing a general practitioner (GP) in the 4 weeks prior to the survey. The outcome variable ("remote consultation") captures whether a respondent reported that their most recent GP consultation took place via telephone or video ("remote consultation"). Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between the likelihood of having a remote consultation and a range of potential explanatory variables including age, gender, insurance status, and socioeconomic status. Results: There was a significant decrease in the percentage of respondents reporting remote consultations over the period of analysis, from 39% in 2020/2021 to 10% in 2022/2023. In later periods, being female (odds ratio [OR] = 1.47 [1.04, 2.09]), having private health insurance (OR = 1.76 [1.13, 2.73]), and having a long-term health condition (OR = 1.53 [0.98, 2.39]) were positively associated with the probability of reporting a remote consultation, while being in an older age group (OR = 0.29 [0.13, 0.62]) was negatively associated with the likelihood of a remote consultation. Discussion: The high prevalence of remote consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic was not maintained in the postpandemic period. Policymakers should consider the reasons for this and consider the gendered, age-based, and insurance-based disparities in remote consultation utilization in the development and promotion of digital health care.

ObjectiveTo evaluate patient and provider experiences using telemedicine for gynecologic visits among a diverse, low-income population.MethodsPatients attending telemedicine visits at a resident-run gynecology clinic completed a modified Telemedicine Usability Questionnaire and providers completed a survey addressing satisfaction and barriers for each visit. The Telemedicine Usability Questionnaire included six subscales to assess telemedicine usability with 1-5 Likert-scale responses. Statistical analyses included Chi-square, Fisher's exact, Wilcoxon rank sum, Wilcoxon signed-rank, and two-sample t-test.ResultsOf 192 patients enrolled, 157 (82%) completed the surveys (87% video visits, 13% telephone visits). Most patients were ethnic minorities (non-Hispanic White-16%, Hispanic-32%, Black-28%, Asian-10%), median age was 40 years (range 18-69), and 63% reported income under $40,000. The total mean Telemedicine Usability Questionnaire score was 4.3/5. The reliability subscale score (3.72/5) was lower compared to all other subscales (p < 0.001). Older respondents were more likely to find telemedicine unreliable (mean age >44 vs <39, p = 0.02). Without telemedicine, 54% would have traveled ≥1 h to appointments, with 46% spending over $35 on travel, and 27% missing ≥ 1 workday. Patients preferred telemedicine for follow-up rather than initial visits (81% vs 33%, p < 0.01). Among providers, residents felt less adequately trained in telemedicine compared to nurse practitioners and fellows (54% vs 46%, p = 0.039).ConclusionLow-income women utilizing telemedicine for outpatient gynecologic care report positive experiences with improved access to healthcare, cost, and time savings compared to in-person visits. Provider experiences were also positive; however, teaching hospitals must evaluate whether trainee providers feel adequately trained to deliver telemedicine visits.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted normal mechanisms of health care delivery and facilitated the rapid and widespread implementation of telehealth technology. As a result, the effectiveness of virtual health care visits in diverse populations represents an important consideration. We used lung cancer screening as a prototype to determine whether subsequent adherence differs between virtual and in-person encounters in an urban, safety-net health care system.

We conducted a retrospective analysis of initial low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) ordered for lung cancer screening from March 2020 through February 2023 within Parkland Health, the integrated safety-net provider for Dallas County, TX. We collected data on patient characteristics, visit type, and LDCT completion from the electronic medical record. Associations among these variables were assessed using the chi-square test. We also performed interaction analyses according to visit type.

Initial LDCT orders were placed for a total of 1,887 patients, of whom 43% were female, 45% were Black, and 17% were Hispanic. Among these orders, 343 (18%) were placed during virtual health care visits. From March to August 2020, 79 of 163 (48%) LDCT orders were placed during virtual visits; after that time, 264 of 1,724 (15%) LDCT orders were placed during virtual visits. No patient characteristics were significantly associated with visit type (in-person v virtual) or LDCT completion. Rates of LDCT completion were 95% after in-person visits and 97% after virtual visits (P = .13).

In a safety-net lung cancer screening population, patients were as likely to complete postvisit initial LDCT when ordered in a virtual encounter as in an in-person encounter.

To examine racial and ethnic differences in telemedicine mental health (tele-MH) use among nursing home (NH) long-stay residents with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) during the pandemic.

Observational study.

The 2020-2021 Minimum Data Set 3.0, Medicare datasets, and Nursing Home Compare data were linked. A total of 259,467 NH long-stay residents with ADRD and 14,159 NHs were included.

The outcome variable was the percentage of NH ADRD long-stayers who used tele-MH in 2021. The main independent variables were NH racial and ethnic compositions (ie, percentages of Black and Hispanic residents) and individual race and ethnicity. We conducted a set of logistic regression models with NH random effect. We first included only individual characteristics and then added NH characteristics.

Approximately 7% and 35% of the study cohort had tele-MH use and MH use in 2021, respectively. In our study cohort, 13.7% were Black, 6.6% were Hispanic, and 79.7% were white residents. The mean age was 83.4. After adjusting for NH characteristics, we found residents in NHs with a high proportion of Hispanic residents were more likely to use tele-MH both compared with those in NHs with a low proportion [odds ratio (OR), 1.867; 95% CI, 1.566-2.226], whereas residents in NHs with a high proportion of Black residents were less likely to use tele-MH both compared with those in NHs with a low proportion (OR, 0.843; 95% CI, 0.928-0.997).

Telemedicine may offer an opportunity for NHs with a higher proportion of Hispanic residents to better address their needs for MH services. However, NHs with a higher proportion of Black residents may face challenges in telemedicine adoption. Future studies are needed to better understand factors that could impact tele-MH use in NHs and reasons that lead to racial and ethnic differences.

There is evidence to support the acceptability of telehealth among oncology patients, but inconsistencies regarding access and use in underserved populations.

This study used the COVID-19 pandemic as a natural experiment to test whether implementation of telehealth for patients referred to a psychosocial oncology (PSO) service would 1) increase PSO access and utilization and 2) reduce racial disparities.

Demographic, medical and appointment completion data for patients referred to a PSO service at an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center from March, 2018 to March, 2022 were examined. Descriptive and multivariate logistical regression analyses at both the patient and visit level were conducted. Outcomes were patient follow-up (i.e. ≥ one scheduled PSO appointment) and visit outcome (completed vs. canceled/no-show).

The sample included 934 White and 610 Black adult patients (69.8% female) aged 18-95 (M = 56.0, SD = 15.3) who scheduled 5,782 PSO visits. Follow-up rates significantly increased post-COVID among White (66.2%-72.2%; Z = 2.17, p = .03), but not Black patients (73.6%-70.4%; Z = 0.88, p = .38). Among N = 1,089 patients who scheduled at least one PSO appointment, telehealth had a significant effect on visit outcomes (X2 = 466.6, df = 2, p < .001). Completed appointments increased (52.5%-79.2%), while rates of canceled (21.8%-11.2%) and no-show appointments (25.7%-9.6%) decreased. Moreover, telehealth resulted in a significantly greater increase in completed appointments for Black patients (44.7%-74.3%), in comparison to White patients (59.4%-81.4%; X2 = 4.02, df = 1, p = .045).

Black patients were less likely than White patients to show an increase in follow-up with PSO services following onset of COVID. However, among patients with one or more scheduled appointments, the use of telehealth significantly decreased racial disparities in appointment completion rates. Findings suggest that the relationship between telehealth and racial disparities in PSO care is nuanced.

Pharmacoequity is a health system and policy goal of ensuring equitable access to high-quality medications for all individuals, regardless of factors such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or resource availability to reduce health disparities. Although measurement frameworks have been widely used in health equity contexts, a focused framework for pharmacoequity remains a critical gap. In this article, we introduce a novel pharmacoequity measurement framework anchored in the patient medication-use journey. The framework includes the following domains: (1) access to health care services, (2) prescription generation, (3) primary medication nonadherence, (4) secondary medication nonadherence, and (5) medication monitoring. For each domain, we provide examples of outcome measures and potential data sources that can be used for evaluation. We also outline an implementation workflow of the pharmacoequity measurement framework that population health stakeholders can use across various settings (eg, health systems, health plans). The framework provides a structured approach to identify existing gaps in the path toward achieving pharmacoequity and lay the foundation for targeted interventions. Additionally, it enables ongoing monitoring of progress toward achieving pharmacoequity while identifying interventions that are effective, scalable, and sustainable.

Telehealth genetic counseling is comparable to in-person visits in terms of satisfaction, knowledge, and psychological outcomes, but using visual aids can be challenging on telehealth platforms. This pilot study assessed if the "screen-sharing" feature via Zoom to display visual aids during results disclosure sessions positively impacted parental experience and comprehension of their child's genomic results, especially in underrepresented groups and those with limited English proficiency.

In the TeleKidSeq pilot study, 409 children with suspected genetic conditions underwent genome sequencing. Families were randomized to receive genomic results via televisits with (ScrS) or without (NScrS) screen-sharing of visual aids. Spanish- or English-speaking parents/legal guardians completed surveys at three time points to assess perceived and objective understanding, perceived confidence, and telehealth experience. Regression models evaluated the effect of screen-sharing over time.

Overall, understanding and telehealth experience ratings were high, with no significant differences between the ScrS (N = 192) and NScrS (N = 200) arms with regard to perceived (p = 0.32) or objective (p = 0.94) understanding, confidence (p = 0.14) over time, or telehealth experience (p = 0.10). When stratifying by sociodemographic characteristics and type of device used during results disclosure, we observed subtle differences in the effect of screen-sharing within some subgroups.

While screen-sharing had no significant impact on overall outcomes, we identified modest effects of screen-sharing within population groups that highlight the need for tailored communication strategies to ensure diverse, multilingual communities derive equitable benefit from telehealth-based genomic results disclosure. Future research is needed to determine whether certain types of visual aids best enhance genomic results disclosure in larger, more robust studies designed to detect smaller effects and subgroup differences.

Sepsis disproportionately affects patients in rural and socially vulnerable communities. A promising strategy to address this disparity is provider-to-provider emergency department (ED)-based telehealth consultation (tele-ED). The objective of this study was to determine if county-level social vulnerability index (SVI) was associated with tele-ED use for sepsis and, if so, which SVI elements were most strongly associated.

We used data from the TELEmedicine as a Virtual Intervention for Sepsis in Rural Emergency Department study. The primary exposures were SVI aggregate and component scores. We used multivariable generalized estimating equations to model the association between SVI and tele-ED use.

Our study cohort included 1191 patients treated in 23 Midwestern rural EDs between August 2016 and June 2019, of whom 326 (27.4%) were treated with tele-ED. Providers in counties with a high SVI were less likely to use tele-ED (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31‒0.87), an effect principally attributable to the housing type and transportation component of SVI (aOR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.22-0.89). Providers who treated fewer sepsis patients (1‒10 vs. 31+ over study period) and therefore may have been less experienced in sepsis care, were more likely to activate tele-ED (aOR = 3.91, 95% CI 2.08‒7.38).

Tele-ED use for sepsis was lower in socially vulnerable counties and higher among providers who treated fewer sepsis patients. These findings suggest that while tele-ED increases access to specialized care, it may not completely ameliorate sepsis disparities due to its less frequent use in socially vulnerable communities.

While increasing telehealth use throughout sports medicine has improved patients' access to health care, some communities may not have the same opportunities to connect with a provider. Barriers to telehealth implementation can be influenced by internal (eg, provider's digital health literacy and resources) and external (eg, community's social determinants of health or "SDOH") factors. This study aimed to assess the impact of internal and external factors on telehealth use by athletic trainers (ATs).

Cross-sectional survey.

In total, 767 ATs participated in the study. Participants (age = 39 [13] y) completed a survey containing the electronic health literacy scale and digital health literacy instrument, reported professional use of telehealth as a provider (yes/no), provided resources at their clinical site, and provided the zip code for the community they served. After data collection, the researchers extracted SDOH information using the zip code data from 2 US databases, including population density, median household income, poverty index, education level, and technology access. Chi-square or independent samples t tests were conducted to compare telehealth use by each SDOH factor.

In total, 62.3% (n = 478/767) of ATs reported using telehealth, and 81.6% of ATs (n = 626) had a dedicated facility to offer health care services. We identified a significant difference in digital health literacy scores between users and nonusers of telehealth (P = .013). We did not identify any significant differences between telehealth users by community type (P = .957), population density (P = .053), income (P = .462), poverty index (P = .073), and computer (P = .211) or broadband internet access (P = .295).

Our data suggest that internal factors such as digital health literacy and clinical site resources may have contributed to an AT's previous telehealth use in clinical practice. However, the SDOH data extracted from the community zip code where the AT provided clinical services were similar for those with and without previous telehealth use.

The COVID-19 Pandemic contributed to accelerating the process of using information and communication technologies and digital technologies in healthcare management and delivery within healthcare systems. At that time, the Czech healthcare system faced the same problems as other European systems and struggled with a temporary limitation of direct provision of healthcare services. It was solved by switching to telemedicine. The Czech healthcare system used telemedicine to a minimal extent until then. Despite adopting the law on healthcare digitisation, it is still one of the countries with a lower level of digitisation of healthcare processes. The article presents the results of an exploratory expert investigation focused on the implementation and development of telemedicine in the Czech Republic. The conducted research aimed to identify problems related to the implementation of telemedicine in practice, place them in the broader framework of the healthcare system and structure them, propose possible solutions, and identify the future challenges of telemedicine in the Czech Republic. We based our study on the results of a three-phase QUAL-QUAN-QUAL research. Data collection in the first phase took the form of individual semi-structured interviews with patients (25) with practical experience in the field of telemedicine, followed by the second quantitative phase of the questionnaire survey with patients (650). The third qualitative phase included semi-structured interviews with experts (17) with practical experience in telemedicine. The introduction and expansion of telemedicine require several fundamental changes. These include adjustments to the legislative environment and changes to the technological infrastructure, organisation of care and work. Several barriers have been identified at the healthcare system level, healthcare providers, healthcare professionals and patients.

Pharmacoequity is a health system and policy goal of ensuring equitable access to high-quality medications for all individuals, regardless of factors such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or resource availability to reduce health disparities. Although measurement frameworks have been widely used in health equity contexts, a focused framework for pharmacoequity remains a critical gap. In this article, we introduce a novel pharmacoequity measurement framework anchored in the patient medication-use journey. The framework includes the following domains: (1) access to health care services, (2) prescription generation, (3) primary medication nonadherence, (4) secondary medication nonadherence, and (5) medication monitoring. For each domain, we provide examples of outcome measures and potential data sources that can be used for evaluation. We also outline an implementation workflow of the pharmacoequity measurement framework that population health stakeholders can use across various settings (eg, health systems, health plans). The framework provides a structured approach to identify existing gaps in the path toward achieving pharmacoequity and lay the foundation for targeted interventions. Additionally, it enables ongoing monitoring of progress toward achieving pharmacoequity while identifying interventions that are effective, scalable, and sustainable.

In obstetrics, telehealth is widely used in the provision of prenatal and postpartum care. The objective was to compare the utilization of commonly recommended services after delivery among individuals receiving telehealth versus in-person postpartum care.

We performed a retrospective cohort study of individuals receiving postpartum care at a single institution between 1 July 2020 and 30 June 2023. The primary exposure was the exclusive use of telehealth versus an in-person visit for postpartum care. Two primary outcomes were assessed between 0 and 365 days after the delivery: 1) long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) method use and 2) pap smear screening. Secondary outcomes occurring between 0 and 365 days after delivery included: clinic-based weight assessment, clinic-based blood pressure assessment, any prescription contraception use, primary care visit, and pregnancy within 1 year.

Among the 9953 individuals, 9058 (91.0%) had a postpartum visit. 1811 (19.9%) utilized telehealth exclusively, which peaked during the COVID-19 pandemic. Exclusive telehealth users were less likely to have a pap smear (21.6 vs. 40.1%, p < 0.001) or use LARCs (8.6 vs. 19.4%, p < 0.001) than those receiving in-person care. In the adjusted analysis, the odds ratio for receiving a pap smear was 0.38 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.47) and for using a LARC was 0.38 (95% CI 0.31-0.47) when comparing telehealth to in-person care. Reduced odds of all secondary outcomes were seen in the exclusive telehealth use compared to the in-person cohort, with the exception of subsequent pregnancy within 1 year, which was not significantly different.

Acknowledging that telehealth now has become an important means for patients to access medical care, these findings should prompt clinicians to consider when an in-person postpartum visit should be offered or recommended over telehealth, especially when a patient may not have a preference or reported barriers to accessing an in-person visit.

There is a lack of studies describing reproductive health service use and outcomes with telehealth in publicly funded clinics in community settings for economically disadvantaged adolescents and young adults (AYA). This study sought to compare use of reproductive health services before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and analyze the types and quality of reproductive health-care services for patients who did and did not complete a telehealth visit.

Medical records were reviewed for AYA who sought reproductive health services at 9 urban family planning and school-based clinics. Visit-type differences and associated factors by year of service and among those who did and did not complete telehealth visits were analyzed.

Twenty-seven thousand nine hundred sixty-one unique patients were served between 2019 and 2021. As compared to 2019, in 2020 and 2021, there were significantly fewer visits by minors (<18 years old) versus young adults (18-24 years old) (p < .001), and by those with male versus female natal sex (p < .001). At least one telehealth visit was completed by 17.98% of patients. Telehealth visit completion was more likely in young adults, female, Black, non-Hispanic, and higher-income patients. Telehealth users were more likely to complete annual sexually transmitted infection testing, had a higher number of visits per year, and had higher odds of requiring a return visit within 2 weeks of the index visit (odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence intervals 1.41-1.76).

Our findings illustrate disparities in telehealth use in this population of economically disadvantaged AYA and provides pragmatic targets for future interventions.

Background: Barriers to attending family-centered rounds (FCR) exist for socially disadvantaged families. Using telehealth to conduct virtual FCR could potentially promote equitable parent/guardian FCR access. The objective of this work was to assess whether the effects of a virtual FCR intervention on parent FCR attendance varied by subgroups defined by social factors. Methods: We conducted a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial of virtual FCR in the neonatal intensive care unit. Parents of intervention arm infants were invited to participate in virtual FCR plus usual care; control arm infants received usual care. Participants were analyzed according to the assigned group and by race/ethnicity, insurance, mother's education, and neighborhood health conditions. We used Poisson regression to estimate and compare FCR parent attendance rates. Heterogeneity of intervention effects was assessed using interaction terms to evaluate the relative benefit of the intervention in increasing parent FCR attendance. Results: We included all enrolled trial subjects (74 intervention, 36 control). Intervention arm infants had 3.36 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.66-4.23) times the FCR parent attendance rate of subjects in the control arm. Compared with the corresponding reference subgroup, intervention benefits were 2.15 times (95% CI: 1.30-3.56) better for racial/ethnic minorities, 3.08 times (95% CI: 1.59-5.95) better for those with private insurance, 2.68 times (95% CI: 1.12-6.40) better for those whose mother reported no college education, and 4.14 times (95% CI: 2.07-8.25) better for those from a neighborhood with worse health conditions. Conclusions: Virtual FCR improved parent FCR attendance overall, with even greater benefits for certain subgroups. Further research is needed to mitigate the differential benefit demonstrated for privately insured subjects.

A 2017 survey of patient perspectives showed overall willingness and comfort to use telemedicine, but low actual use. Given recent growth and widespread exposure of patients to telemedicine, patient preferences are likely to have changed.

This study aimed to (1) identify demographic trends in patient preferences and experiences; (2) measure ease of use and satisfaction of telemedicine; and (3) measure changes in telemedicine use, willingness, and comfort since 2017.

We replicated a 2017 study with a nationwide survey of US adults. The survey, an extended version of the previous study, measured patient health care access as well as knowledge, experiences, and preferences regarding telemedicine encounters. We recruited participants using SurveyMonkey Audience in July 2022. We used descriptive statistics and generalized estimating equations to measure change and identify trends.

We accrued 4577 complete responses. Patient experience with telemedicine was substantially higher in 2022 than in 2017, with 61.1% (vs 5.3%) of participants aware that their primary care provider offered telemedicine and 34.5% (vs 3.5%) reporting use of telemedicine with their primary care provider. This study also reported ease of use and satisfaction rates to be similar to in-person visits, while overall willingness and comfort in using telemedicine increased from 2017. Individuals at the poverty line were significantly less likely to report satisfaction with telemedicine visits. We found increased interpersonal distance in a patient and health care professional relationship significantly reduced patient ease of use, willingness, and comfort in using telemedicine.

This study identified an association between income and patient satisfaction, conveying the importance of understanding telemedicine in relation to health care access and equity. Telemedicine ease of use and satisfaction were comparable to in-person visits. Individuals reported greater use and higher positive perceptions of telemedicine willingness and comfort since 2017.

Older adults with cancer heterogeneously experience health care, treatment, and symptoms. Geriatric assessment (GA) offers a comprehensive evaluation of an older individual's health status and can predict cancer-related outcomes in individuals with solid tumors and those with hematologic malignancies. In the last decade, randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the benefits of GA and GA management (GAM), which uses GA information to provide tailored intervention strategies to address GA impairments (e.g., implementing physical therapy for impaired physical function). Multiple phase 3 clinical trials in older adults with solid tumors and hematologic malignancies have demonstrated that GAM improves treatment completion, quality of life, communication, and advance care planning while reducing treatment-related toxicity, falls, and polypharmacy. Nonetheless, implementation and uptake of GAM remain challenging. Various strategies have been proposed, including the use of GA screening tools, to identify patients most likely to benefit from GAM, the systematic engagement of the oncology workforce in the delivery of GAM, and the integration of technologies like telemedicine and mobile health to enhance the availability of GA and GAM interventions. Health inequities in minoritized groups persist, and systematic GA implementation has the potential to capture social determinants of health that are relevant to equitable care. Caregivers play an important role in cancer care and experience burden themselves. GA can guide dyadic supportive care interventions, ultimately helping both patients and caregivers achieve optimal health.

The Latinx immigrant population experienced one of the highest COVID-19 death rates. Those left behind have exhibited rising rates of mental illness, particularly, pandemic-related prolonged grief disorder. The Latinx immigrant population is uniquely vulnerable to this disorder as a result of disrupted culturally appropriate bereavement practices, constrained social support, and concurrent COVID-19 stressors and immigration-related trauma. Despite a rising call for research on pandemic-related prolonged grief disorder, little is known about the true prevalence, cause, and appropriate treatment protocol behind this disorder in the Latinx immigrant population. Four areas of research critical to the identification and understanding of pandemic-related prolonged grief disorder in this population are recommended: 1) death and bereavement in transnational settings, 2) immigrant social networks and disrupted bereavement, 3) COVID-19 stressors and grieving, and 4) prolonged grief disorder and mental illness comorbidities. An understanding of these four contributing areas to Latinx immigrants' vulnerability to prolonged grief disorder is imperative to providers' development of assessments and treatment protocols needed to identify and treat prolonged grief disorder in this population.

Missed appointments can lead to treatment delays and adverse outcomes. Telemedicine may improve appointment completion because it addresses barriers to in-person visits, such as childcare and transportation. This study compared appointment completion for appointments using telemedicine versus in-person care in a large cohort of patients at an urban academic health sciences center.

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of electronic health record data to determine whether telemedicine appointments have higher odds of completion compared to in-person care appointments, January 1, 2021, and April 30, 2023. The data were obtained from the University of South Florida (USF), a large academic health sciences center serving Tampa, FL, and surrounding communities. We implemented 1:1 propensity score matching based on age, gender, race, visit type, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI).

The matched cohort included 87 376 appointments, with diverse patient demographics. The percentage of completed telemedicine appointments exceeded that of completed in-person care appointments by 9.2 points (73.4% vs 64.2%, P < .001). The adjusted odds ratio for telemedicine versus in-person care in relation to appointment completion was 1.64 (95% CI, 1.59-1.69, P < .001), indicating that telemedicine appointments are associated with 64% higher odds of completion than in-person care appointments when controlling for other factors.

This cohort study indicated that telemedicine appointments are more likely to be completed than in-person care appointments, regardless of demographics, comorbidity, payment type, or distance.

Telemedicine appointments are more likely to be completed than in-person healthcare appointments.

Background: After-hours telemedicine services for emergency care are thought to offer a solution for patients who live at a distance from traditional face-to-face emergency services. This study evaluates such a service in a Health Maintenance Organization, focusing on the differences between central and peripheral populations. Methods: In this cross-sectional database study, we collected data regarding the encounter and patient characteristics, including prescriptions, referrals for further evaluation in a traditional emergency department (ED), and the distance from a traditional ED. Other outcome measures included health care utilization after the encounter such as primary care physician (PCP) encounters, additional telemedicine encounters, ED visits, and hospitalization. Results: In total, 45,411 patient visits were analyzed. Medication was prescribed in 25% of the encounters, and a referral to an ED was given in 22%. In total, 17.7% of the patients visited an ED within 24 h of the index encounter. In total, 64.8% of patients visited a PCP in the following 30 days. No further care was needed in 32.4% of the encounters. In multivariable logistic regression, the odds of using the service were lower for low socio-economic status groups and inhabitants of the periphery than the central areas. A weak reverse correlation was observed in Jewish sectors regarding distance from traditional ED, whereas no correlation was found in the Arab sector. Conclusion: It is commonly believed that telemedicine overcomes geographical barriers. The results of this research do not support this hypothesis.

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a surge in telehealth utilization. However, language barriers have emerged as a potential obstacle to effective telemedicine engagement, impacting millions of limited English proficient (LEP) individuals. Understanding the role of language spoken in telehealth outcomes is critical, particularly in cancer care, in which consistent follow-up and communication are vital. The primary objective was to assess the impact of telehealth utilization and primary language spoken on clinical outcomes in cancer patients.

This study utilized a retrospective cohort design, encompassing cancer patients seen at the Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2022. The study incorporated both in-person and telehealth visits, examining the association between encounter type and clinical outcomes.

The study included 7890 patients with more than one outpatient visit during the study period. There was decreased telehealth utilization in non-English speaking cancer patients throughout the pandemic. Increased telehealth utilization was associated with higher rates of admission, irrespective of cancer type. Additionally, telehealth visits were associated with longer duration of subsequent admissions compared to in-person visits. Spanish-speaking patients utilizing telehealth had higher rates of re-admission compared to English speakers utilizing telehealth. Patients who died had higher rates of telehealth utilization compared to patients who survived.

This study demonstrates that primary language spoken is associated with differences in telehealth utilization and associated outcomes in cancer patients. These differences suggest that the interplay of telehealth and language could contribute to widening of disparities in clinical outcomes in these populations. The study underscores the need to optimize telehealth usage and minimize its limitations to enhance the quality of cancer care in a telehealth-driven era.

Background: Patient portals can improve access to electronic health information and enhance patient engagement. However, disparities in patient portal utilization remain, affecting disadvantaged communities disproportionately. This study examined patient- and provider-level factors associated with portal usage among Medicaid recipients in a large federally qualified health center (FQHC) network in Texas. Methods: Deidentified electronic medical records of patients 18 years or older from a large Texas FQHC network were analyzed. The dependent variable was a binary flag indicating portal usage during the study period. Independent variables included patient- and provider-level factors. Patient-level factors included sociodemographic, geographic, and clinical characteristics. Provider characteristics included primary service line, provider type, provider language, and years in practice. Because the analysis was at the individual level, a multivariable logistic regression model focused on adjusted associations between independent variables and portal usage. Results: The analytic sample consisted of 9,271 individuals. Compared with individuals 18-39 years, patients 50 years and older had lower odds (50-64 OR: 0.60, p < 0.001; 65+ OR: 0.51, p < 0.001) of portal usage. Males were less likely to use portals (OR: 0.44, p = 0.03), and compared to Non-Hispanic Whites, Non-Hispanic Black (OR: 0.86, p = 0.02) and Hispanics (OR: 0.83, p < 0.001) were significantly less likely to use portals. Individuals with 1 or more telemedicine consults had a two-times greater odds of portal usage (OR: 1.97, p < 0.001). Compared to individuals who had clinic visits in December 2018, portal usage was significantly higher in the pandemic months (March 2020-November 2020, all p's < 0.01). Importantly, the behavioral health service line had the greatest odds (OR: 1.52, p < 0.001), whereas the dental service line had the lowest odds (OR: 0.69, p = 0.01) compared to family practice. No other provider characteristics were significant. Conclusion: Our finding of significant patient-level factors is important and can contribute to developing appropriate patient-focused health information technology approaches to ensure equitable access and maximize the potential benefits of patient portals in health care delivery.

Introduction The use of telephone and video consultations has vastly increased since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Health care providers in traditional clinical practices have embraced these virtual consultations as an alternative to face-to-face consultations, but there has also been a simultaneous increase in services offered directly to consumers via commercial entities. One of the main challenges in telemedicine (and the broader field of digital health) is how to conduct a meaningful ethical assessment of such services. Aim This article presents a novel framework for practical ethical analysis of direct-to-consumer virtual general practitioner consultation services in Aotearoa New Zealand. Methods First, a scoping review of academic and policy documents identified the core ethical challenges arising from virtual consultations. Second, a qualitative analysis was conducted to translate the main ethical themes and subthemes into practical questions to assess virtual general practice services. Results A total of 49 relevant documents were selected for review. The six key ethical themes related to telemedicine were: privacy, security, and confidentiality; equity; autonomy and informed consent; quality and standards of care; patient empowerment; and continuity of care. A practical ethical checklist consisting of 25 questions was developed from these themes and their subthemes. Discussion The checklist provides an accessible way of incorporating ethics into technology assessment and can be used by all relevant stakeholders, including patients, health care providers, and developers. Application of the framework contributes to improving the quality of virtual consultation services with a specific focus on ethics.

Telehealth has untapped potential to improve health care for underserved communities. However, it remains underutilized, limiting opportunities to improve continuity of care and health care outcomes. This pilot study investigates attitudes and barriers to telehealth at Stony Brook HOME, Renaissance School of Medicine's student-run free-health clinic in Suffolk County, NY.

Surveys (n = 100) were electronically administered bimonthly during clinic waiting room time from May 2022 to August 2023 in both English (40%) and Spanish (60%). Surveys collected information on patient demographics, perceived patient barriers and attitudes to telehealth, and technological comfort levels.

Most patients were Hispanic/Latino (68%), female (54%), and 40-60 years old (52%). Spanish speakers often come from high social vulnerability regions. English speakers were more likely to own a smartphone, computer, or tablet than Spanish speakers (p = 0.046). English speakers reported higher levels of technological comfort using a smartphone or tablet (p = 0.0033) and using it for their health care (p = 0.03). Finally, 100% of English speakers reported reliable internet access compared to 66.7% of Spanish speakers.

These results demonstrate that barriers to telehealth are being disproportionately felt by Spanish speakers, thus necessitating survey-directed interventions to address this disparity.

The Hispanic community represents a sizeable community that experiences inequities in the US health care system. As the system has moved toward digital health platforms, evaluating the potential impact on Hispanic communities is critical.

The study aimed to investigate demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors contributing to low telehealth use in Hispanic communities.

We used a retrospective observation study design to examine the study objectives. The COVID-19 Research Database Consortium provided the Analytics IQ PeopleCore consumer data and Office Alley claims data. The study period was from March 2020 to April 2021. Multiple logistic regression was used to determine the odds of using telehealth services.

We examined 3,478,287 unique Hispanic patients, 16.6% (577,396) of whom used telehealth. Results suggested that patients aged between 18 and 44 years were more likely to use telehealth (odds ratio [OR] 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.1; P<.001) than patients aged older than 65 years. Across all age groups, patients with high incomes were at least 20% more likely to use telehealth than patients with lower incomes (P<.001); patients who had a primary care physician (P=.01), exhibited high medical usage (P<.001), or were interested in exercise (P=.03) were more likely to use telehealth; patients who had unhealthy behaviors such as smoking and alcohol consumption were less likely to use telehealth (P<.001). Male patients were less likely than female patients to use telehealth among patients aged 65 years and older (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.93-0.95; P<.001), while male patients aged between 18 and 44 years were more likely to use telehealth (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.07; P<.001). Among patients younger than 65 years, full-time employment was positively associated with telehealth use (P<.001). Patients aged between 18 and 44 years with high school or less education were 2% less likely to use telehealth (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99; P=.005). Results also revealed a positive association with using WebMD (WebMD LLC) among patients aged older than 44 years (P<.001), while there was a negative association with electronic prescriptions among those who were aged between 18 and 44 years (P=.009) and aged between 45 and 64 years (P=.004).

This study demonstrates that telehealth use among Hispanic communities is dependent upon factors such as age, gender, education, socioeconomic status, current health care engagement, and health behaviors. To address these challenges, we advocate for interdisciplinary approaches that involve medical professionals, insurance providers, and community-based services actively engaging with Hispanic communities and promoting telehealth use. We propose the following recommendations: enhance access to health insurance, improve access to primary care providers, and allocate fiscal and educational resources to support telehealth use. As telehealth increasingly shapes health care delivery, it is vital for professionals to facilitate the use of all available avenues for accessing care.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, we have seen rapid growth in telemedicine use. However, telehealth care and services are not equally distributed, and not all patients with breast cancer have equal access across US regions. There are notable gaps in existing literature regarding the influence of neighborhood-level socioeconomic status on telemedicine use in patients with breast cancer and oncology services offered through telehealth versus in-person visits.

We assessed the relationship between neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and telemedicine use among patients with breast cancer and examined differential provisions of oncology services between telehealth and in-person visits.

Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was measured using the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), with higher scores indicating greater disadvantages. Telemedicine and in-person visits were defined as having had a telehealth and in-person visit with a provider, respectively, in the past 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine the association between ADI and telemedicine use. The McNemar test was used to assess match-paired data on types of oncology services comparing telehealth and in-person visits.

The mean age of the patients with breast cancer (n=1163) was 61.8 (SD 12.0) years; 4.58% (52/1161) identified as Asian, 19.72% (229/1161) as Black, 3.01% (35/1161) as Hispanic, and 72.78% (845/1161) as White. Overall, 35.96% (416/1157) had a telemedicine visit in the past 12 months. Of these patients, 65% (266/409) had a videoconference visit only, 22.7% (93/409) had a telephone visit only, and 12.2% (50/409) had visits by both videoconference and telephone. Higher ADI scores were associated with a lower likelihood of telemedicine use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.97). Black (AOR 2.38, 95% CI 1.41-4.00) and Hispanic (AOR 2.65, 95% CI 1.07-6.58) patients had greater odds of telemedicine use than White patients. Compared to patients with high school or less education, those with an associate's degree (AOR 2.67, 95% CI 1.33-5.35), a bachelor's degree (AOR 2.75, 95% CI 1.38-5.48), or a graduate or professional degree (AOR 2.57, 95% CI 1.31-5.04) had higher odds of telemedicine use in the past 12 months. There were no significant differences in providing treatment consultation (45/405, 11.1% vs 55/405, 13.6%; P=.32) or cancer genetic counseling (11/405, 2.7% vs 19/405, 4.7%; P=.14) between telehealth and in-person visits. Of the telemedicine users, 95.8% (390/407) reported being somewhat to extremely satisfied, and 61.8% (254/411) were likely or very likely to continue using telemedicine.

In this study of a multiethnic cohort of patients with breast cancer, our findings suggest that neighborhood-level socioeconomic disparities exist in telemedicine use and that telehealth visits could be used to provide treatment consultation and cancer genetic counseling. Oncology programs should address these disparities and needs to improve care delivery and achieve telehealth equity for their patient populations.

Understanding the challenges and potential of telehealth visits (THVs) in a large population can inform future practice and policy discussion for pediatric orthopaedic and sports medicine (OSM) care. We comprehensively assess telehealth challenges and potential in a large pediatric OSM population based on access, visit completion, patient satisfaction, and technological challenges.

Demographics, address, insurance, visit information, patient feedback, experience with video visits, and technical challenges of all 2019 to 2020 visits at our hospital were assessed (3,278,006 visits). We evaluated the differences in rate of telehealth utilization, rate of patient adherence, disparities in care access and patient satisfaction, and technological issues.

Compared with in-person prepandemic visits, THVs had lower ratios of non-White patients (by 5.8%; P <0.001), Hispanic patients (by 2.8%; P <0.001) and patients with public insurance (by 1.8%; P <0.001), and a higher mean distance between the patient's residence and clinic (by 18.8 miles; P <0.001). There were minimal differences in median household income (average $2297 less in THV; P <0.001) and social vulnerability index (average 0.01 points lower in THV; P <0.001) between groups. THVs had comparable patient satisfaction to in-person visits. Non-White patients, Hispanics, and those with public insurance had lower ratings for both in-person visits and THVs and had more technical difficulties during their THV.

Telehealth is a viable method of care for a range of pediatric OSM conditions, providing a similar quality of care as in-person visits with a greater geographic reach. However, in its current format, reduced disparities were not observed in pediatric OSM THVs.

Level III.

Virtual nursing interventions, which use virtual reality and artificial intelligence technology to provide remote care for patients, have become increasingly common in cancer treatment, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was to evaluate the efficacy of virtual nursing interventions for cancer patients in contrast to conventional, in-person care.

Eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) contrasted virtual nursing with conventional techniques that satisfied the inclusion criteria were found after a thorough search across databases including PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and APA PsycINFO. RevMan 5.3 software was utilized for data analysis after the included literature's quality was assessed and the intended consequence indicators were extracted.

Virtual nurse interventions enhanced the quality of life of cancer patients (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.01 to 0.43, P = 0.04). Virtual nurse interventions provide cancer patients with important support, particularly when access to in-person care is limited. In light of the many demands that cancer patients have, further research is required to overcome implementation issues and provide fair access to virtual treatment.

All things considered, virtual nursing shows potential as an adjunctive element of all-inclusive cancer care delivery models, deserving of further investigation and thoughtful incorporation into healthcare systems.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had challenged health systems worldwide, including those in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Aside from measures to control the pandemic, efforts were made to continue the provision and use of essential services. At that time, information was not organised and readily available to guide country-level decision-making. This review aims to summarise evaluated interventions to maintain essential services for maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health in response to COVID-19 in LMICs, in order to learn from the interventions and facilitate their use in the next disruption.

We conducted a scoping review by Embase, MEDLINE, and Global Health for literature published between 1 January 2020 and 26 December 2022, without restrictions for language. We extracted information about the setting, population targeted, service type, intervention, and evaluation from the included studies and summarised it both quantitatively and narratively.

We retrieved 11 395 unique references and included 30 studies describing 32 evaluated interventions. Most interventions (84%) were implemented in 2020, with a median duration of five months (interquartile range (IQR) = 3-8), and were conducted in Africa (34%) or Southeast Asia (31%). Interventions focussed on maintaining services for maternal and newborn health (56%) or children and adolescents (56%) were most common. Interventions aimed to address problems related to access (94%), fear (31%), health workers shortage (25%), and vulnerability (22%). Types of interventions included telehealth (69%), protocols/guidelines to adapt care provision (56%), and health education (40%); a few entailed health worker training (16%). The described interventions were mostly led by the public (56%) or non-profit (34%) sectors. Methodologies of their evaluations were heterogeneous; the majority used quantitative methods, had a prospective research design, and used output- and outcome-based indicators.

In this review, we identified an important and growing body of evidence of evaluated interventions to maintain essential services for maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health during COVID-19 in LMICs. To improve preparedness and responsiveness for future disruptions, managers for decision-makers in LMICs could benefit from up-to-date inventories describing implemented interventions and evaluations to facilitate evidence-based implementation of strategies, as well as tools for conducting optimal quality operational and implementation research during disruptions (e.g. rapid ethical approvals, access to routine data).

Introduction: Telehealth is becoming integral to health care delivery, which may create a higher need for better internet. This is the first study to examine whether users are willing to spend more on their internet if they are (1) more experienced in using telehealth, (2) more optimistic about telehealth benefits, and (3) less concerned about the difficulty of using telehealth. Methods: We surveyed 5,200 Americans about their willingness to pay (WTP) for internet speed and quality on the one hand, and their (1) prior use of telehealth, (2) opinion about the benefits of telehealth, and (3) opinion about the difficulties of using telehealth. We stratified the sample using the three aspects above and conducted a conjoint analysis to estimate the WTP for internet speed and quality within each stratum. Results: Compared with respondents who had never used telehealth, respondents who had used five to six different types of telehealth services were willing to spend 50.4% more on their internet plans. Users who most firmly believed in the benefits of telehealth were willing to spend 59.2% more than the most pessimistic users. Users who had the lowest concerns about the difficulty of using telehealth were willing to spend 114% more than users with the most perceived difficulty. Discussion: We found strong ties between the WTP for internet and prior telehealth use and perceptions of telehealth benefits and barriers. Thus, internet expenditures may be influenced by users' anticipation of using telehealth. Future studies may investigate the causality of the relationship.

This article aims to describe the ways in which digital health technologies are currently being used to improve the delivery of cancer care, highlight opportunities to expand their use, and discuss barriers to effective and equitable implementation.

The utilization of digital health tools and development of novel care delivery models that leverage such tools is expanding. Recent studies have shown feasibility and increased implementation in the setting of oncologic care. With technological advances and key policy changes, utilization of digital health tools has greatly increased over the past two decades and transformed how cancer care is delivered. As digital health tools are expanded and refined, there is potential for improved access to and quality and efficiency of cancer care. However, careful consideration should be given to key barriers of digital health tool adoption, such as infrastructural, patient-level, and health systems-level challenges, to ensure equitable access to care and improvement in health outcomes.

Telemedicine expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, though use differed by age, sex, race or ethnicity, educational attainment, income, and location. It is unclear if high telehealth use or inequities persisted late into the pandemic.

This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of, inequities in, and primary reasons for telehealth visits a year after telemedicine expansion.

We used cross-sectional data from the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 6), the first cycle with data on telemedicine. In total, 4830 English- and Spanish-speaking US adults (aged ≥18 years) were included in this study. The primary outcomes were telehealth visit attendance in the 12 months before March 7, 2022, to November 8, 2022, and the primary reason for the most recent telehealth visit. We evaluated sociodemographic and clinical predictors of telehealth visit attendance and the primary reason for the most recent telehealth visit through Poisson regression. Analyses were weighted according to HINTS 6 standards.

We included 4830 participants (mean age 48.3, SD 17.5 years; 50.28% women; 65.21% White). Among US adults, 38.78% reported having a telehealth visit in the previous year. Telehealth visit attendance rates were similar across age, race or ethnicity, income, and urban versus rural location. However, individuals with a telehealth visit were less likely to live in the Midwest (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] 0.65, 95% CI 0.54-0.77), and more likely to be women (aPR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06-1.38), college graduates or postgraduates (aPR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.46), covered by health insurance (aPR 1.56, 95% CI 1.08-2.26), and married or cohabitating (aPR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03-1.32), adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, frequency of health care visits, and comorbidities. Among participants with a telehealth visit in the past year, the primary reasons for their most recent visit were minor or acute illness (32.15%), chronic disease management (21%), mental health or substance abuse (16.94%), and an annual exam (16.22%). Older adults were more likely to report that the primary reason for their most recent telehealth visit was for chronic disease management (aPR 2.08, 95% CI 1.33-3.23), but less likely to report that it was for a mental health or substance abuse issue (aPR 0.19, 95% CI 0.10-0.35), adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and frequency of health care visits.

Among US adults, telehealth visit attendance was high more than a year after telemedicine expansion and did not differ by age, race or ethnicity, income, or urban versus rural location. Telehealth could continue to be leveraged following COVID-19 to improve access to care and health equity.