Current trends in oncology-related utilization of digital health (telemedicine, RPM, and asynchronous messaging).

Abstract

e13688 Background: It is well established that digital health (particularly telehealth) utilization increased in response to the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the extent to which digital health is used in oncology care is unknown. Conceptually, telehealth and other digital health solutions may alleviate some of the emotional, financial, and physical burdens associated with receiving oncology care. The objective of this study was to examine trends in the utilization of digital health (telehealth, remote patient monitoring (RPM), and asynchronous messaging (AM)) among cancer patients and the demographics of those patients relative to digital health and oncology patients writ large. Methods: We used the Trilliant Health national all-payer claims database to analyze digital health interactions for both oncology and non-oncology patients from Jan 2020 - Jun 2022. We defined a digital health visit as any visit with a procedure code for telehealth, RPM, or AM. An oncology care visit (digital or in-person) was defined as any visit with a primary diagnosis of cancer. An oncology digital health visit was defined as a visit with one of the digital health procedure codes coupled with a primary diagnosis of cancer. Results: Digital health represented 3.19% of total oncology care volume, a majority of which was telehealth (3.18%). Among all telehealth visits, 0.9% of visits were for oncology-related care. Additionally, a majority (72.8%) of these oncology-related telehealth visits were for E&M encounters related to ongoing cancer care. By payer type, telehealth visits were more common among commercially insured patients (56.1%) compared to commercially insured patients’ share of all oncology care (39.8%). While overall telehealth utilization is disproportionately female (62.2%), women comprised 51.2% of all oncology care volume and 52.5% of all oncology-related telehealth volume. While the 65+ population accounts for just 19.3% of all telehealth volume, they are responsible for 61.1% of telehealth oncology-related volume–more closely resembling that age group’s 73.5% share of total oncology care volume. Oncology care represented 0.2% and 0.5% of total RPM and AM volume, respectively. Conclusions: Oncology digital health visits remain a very small portion of overall digital health utilization and total oncology care. Prior research found that the share of younger patients seeing oncology providers is increasing over time, signaling worsening patient acuity. Given the demand for digital health overall skews younger, it is likely that demand for more virtual cancer care services will increase. While research suggests digital health yields cost savings, more needs to be understood about the quality implications of virtual versus in-person visits. While virtual care increases access to those with time and travel constraints, providers need to ensure equal access to these services for all patients.