Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented shift in ambulatory cardiovascular care from in-person to remote visits. To understand whether the transition to remote visits is associated with disparities in patient use of care, diagnostic test ordering, and medication prescribing. This cross-sectional study used electronic health records data for all ambulatory cardiology visits at an urban, multisite health system in Los Angeles County, California, during 2 periods: April 1, 2019, to December 31, 2019 (pre-COVID) and April 1 to December 31, 2020 (COVID-era). Statistical analysis was performed from January to February 2021. In-person or remote ambulatory cardiology clinic visit at one of 31 during the pre-COVID period or COVID-era period. Comparison of patient characteristics and frequencies of medication ordering and cardiology-specific testing across 4 visit types (pre-COVID in-person (reference), COVID-era in-person, COVID-era video, COVID-era telephone). This study analyzed data from 87 182 pre-COVID in-person, 74 498 COVID-era in-person, 4720 COVID-era video, and 10 381 COVID-era telephone visits. Across visits, 79 572 patients were female (45.0%), 127 080 patients were non-Hispanic White (71.9%), and the mean (SD) age was 68.1 (17.0) years. Patients accessing COVID-era remote visits were more likely to be Asian, Black, or Hispanic individuals (24 934 pre-COVID in-person visits [28.6%] vs 19 742 COVID-era in-person visits [26.5%] vs 3633 COVID-era video visits [30.4%] vs 1435 COVID-era telephone visits [35.0%]; P < .001 for all comparisons), have private insurance (34 063 pre-COVID in-person visits [39.1%] vs 25 474 COVID-era in-person visits [34.2%] vs 2562 COVID-era video visits [54.3%] vs 4264 COVID-era telephone visits [41.1%]; P < .001 for COVID-era in-person vs video and COVID-era in-person vs telephone), and have cardiovascular comorbidities (eg, hypertension: 37 166 pre-COVID in-person visits [42.6%] vs 31 359 COVID-era in-person visits [42.1%] vs 2006 COVID-era video visits [42.5%] vs 5181 COVID-era telephone visits [49.9%]; P < .001 for COVID-era in-person vs telephone; and heart failure: 14 319 pre-COVID in-person visits [16.4%] vs 10 488 COVID-era in-person visits [14.1%] vs 1172 COVID-era video visits [24.8%] vs 2674 COVID-era telephone visits [25.8%]; P < .001 for COVID-era in-person vs video and COVID-era in-person vs telephone). After adjusting for patient and visit characteristics and in comparison with pre-COVID in-person visits, during video and telephone visits, clinicians had lower odds of ordering any medication (COVID-era in-person: odds ratio [OR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.60-0.64], COVID-era video: OR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.20-0.24]; COVID-era telephone: OR, 0.14 [95% CI, 0.13-0.15]) or tests, such as electrocardiograms (COVID-era in-person: OR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.58-0.62]; COVID-era video: OR, 0.03 [95% CI, 0.02-0.04]; COVID-era telephone: OR, 0.02 [95% CI, 0.01-0.03]) or echocardiograms (COVID-era in-person: OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.18-1.24]; COVID-era video: OR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.42-0.52]; COVID-era telephone: OR, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.25-0.31]). Patients who were Asian, Black, or Hispanic, had private insurance, and had at least one of several cardiovascular comorbidities used remote cardiovascular care more frequently in the COVID-era period. Clinician ordering of diagnostic testing and medications consistently decreased when comparing pre-COVID vs COVID-era and in-person vs remote visits. Further studies are needed to clarify whether these decreases represent a reduction in the overuse of tests and medications vs an underuse of indicated testing and prescribing.

Highlights

  • The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented shift in ambulatory care from in-person to remote visits.[1]

  • We investigated the ordering frequencies of the most common cardiology-specific diagnostic tests including electrocardiograms (ECGs), transthoracic echocardiograms (TTEs), coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), nuclear stress imaging, stress echocardiogram, exercise stress ECG, coronary artery calcium scan, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and external ECG monitoring tests

  • We found that ordering practices appeared to change in association with the severity of the local COVID-19 case incidence, but we found that the differences between in-person, video, and telephone visits persisted across nearly every month of the 9-month period of study

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an unprecedented shift in ambulatory care from in-person to remote visits.[1] Changes to federal regulations and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement policies facilitated an increase in the number of Medicare beneficiaries using telemedicine services from 13 000 individuals a week prior to COVID-19 to nearly 1.7 million individuals in the last week of April 2020.2 Prior work, often conducted in controlled study settings, has indicated that telemedicine has the potential to improve care for patients, including those with cardiovascular conditions.[3,4,5,6,7] It remains unknown how this large-scale transition to remote care in the real world has changed clinical practice patterns in cardiology both in terms of the patients who are able to access care as well as the type and quality of care that is being delivered. We further conjectured that because of the lack of physical exam, remote visits might result in fewer medication changes and more diagnostic tests such as nuclear stress imaging and brain natriuretic peptide tests

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.