Medicare telehealth utilization by Rural Health Clinics and Federally Qualified Health Centers prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Yvonne Jonk PhD, Heidi O'Connor MS, John Gale MS, Deborah Thayer MBA
{"title":"Medicare telehealth utilization by Rural Health Clinics and Federally Qualified Health Centers prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"Yvonne Jonk PhD,&nbsp;Heidi O'Connor MS,&nbsp;John Gale MS,&nbsp;Deborah Thayer MBA","doi":"10.1111/jrh.12920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>To address the extent to which Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and independent and provider-based Rural Health Clinics (RHCs) were using telehealth prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A nationally representative 5% sample of Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries who used outpatient services at FQHCs and RHCs were identified within the 2019–2021 5% Medicare Limited Data Set Outpatient and Carrier files. Rural-Urban Continuum Codes were used to identify rural–urban clinic locations. Logistic regression included three-way interaction terms for time, rurality, and clinic type.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Telehealth use curbed the decline in outpatient visits for all clinic types during the pandemic. Telehealth use declined as the pandemic continued in 2021 yet remained higher than pre-pandemic levels. FQHCs had higher telehealth use (18%–31%) than RHCs (8%–14%) in 2020–2021. Across all years, tele-behavioral health was the primary venue for originating and distant site providers. Overall, 19%–34% of originating site providers were psychiatrists and 10%–31% were primary care providers. Likely due to patients sheltering-in-place (at home), 2020–2021 distant site providers were largely primary care providers. Urban FQHCs experienced the largest increase in telehealth use during the pandemic (24.6% increase in urban, 14.4%–15.8% in rural) followed by rural ID_RHCs (10.2%–11.7%). RHCs were less likely to provide telehealth services than FQHCs during the pandemic.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Telehealth played a key role in facilitating access to health services during the height of the pandemic (2020–2021). Telehealth flexibilities were associated with greater telehealth use among FQHCs and RHCs but did not make up for the overall decline in health service use.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50060,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rural Health","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jrh.12920","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To address the extent to which Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and independent and provider-based Rural Health Clinics (RHCs) were using telehealth prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

A nationally representative 5% sample of Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries who used outpatient services at FQHCs and RHCs were identified within the 2019–2021 5% Medicare Limited Data Set Outpatient and Carrier files. Rural-Urban Continuum Codes were used to identify rural–urban clinic locations. Logistic regression included three-way interaction terms for time, rurality, and clinic type.

Findings

Telehealth use curbed the decline in outpatient visits for all clinic types during the pandemic. Telehealth use declined as the pandemic continued in 2021 yet remained higher than pre-pandemic levels. FQHCs had higher telehealth use (18%–31%) than RHCs (8%–14%) in 2020–2021. Across all years, tele-behavioral health was the primary venue for originating and distant site providers. Overall, 19%–34% of originating site providers were psychiatrists and 10%–31% were primary care providers. Likely due to patients sheltering-in-place (at home), 2020–2021 distant site providers were largely primary care providers. Urban FQHCs experienced the largest increase in telehealth use during the pandemic (24.6% increase in urban, 14.4%–15.8% in rural) followed by rural ID_RHCs (10.2%–11.7%). RHCs were less likely to provide telehealth services than FQHCs during the pandemic.

Conclusions

Telehealth played a key role in facilitating access to health services during the height of the pandemic (2020–2021). Telehealth flexibilities were associated with greater telehealth use among FQHCs and RHCs but did not make up for the overall decline in health service use.

在COVID-19大流行之前和期间,农村卫生诊所和联邦合格卫生中心对医疗保险远程医疗的利用。
目的:研究在2019冠状病毒病大流行之前和期间,联邦合格医疗中心(fqhc)以及独立和基于提供者的农村卫生诊所(RHCs)使用远程医疗的程度。方法:在2019-2021年5%的医疗保险有限数据集门诊和承运人文件中确定了在fqhc和RHCs使用门诊服务的5%医疗保险按服务收费受益人的全国代表性样本。使用农村-城市连续码来确定农村-城市诊所的位置。Logistic回归包括时间、乡村性和诊所类型的三方交互项。研究结果:大流行期间,远程医疗的使用抑制了所有诊所类型门诊访问量的下降。随着2021年大流行的持续,远程医疗的使用有所下降,但仍高于大流行前的水平。2020-2021年,fqhc的远程医疗使用率(18%-31%)高于RHCs(8%-14%)。在所有年份中,远程行为保健是原始和远程现场提供者的主要场所。总体而言,19%-34%的原址提供者是精神科医生,10%-31%是初级保健提供者。可能是由于患者在原地(家中)避难,2020-2021年远程站点提供者主要是初级保健提供者。在大流行期间,城市fqhc的远程医疗使用增幅最大(城市增加24.6%,农村增加14.4%-15.8%),其次是农村ID_RHCs(10.2%-11.7%)。在大流行期间,地区卫生保健中心提供远程保健服务的可能性低于地区卫生保健中心。结论:在大流行高峰期(2020-2021年),远程医疗在促进获得卫生服务方面发挥了关键作用。远程医疗灵活性与fqhc和RHCs中更多的远程医疗使用有关,但并不能弥补卫生服务使用的总体下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Rural Health
Journal of Rural Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
86
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Rural Health, a quarterly journal published by the NRHA, offers a variety of original research relevant and important to rural health. Some examples include evaluations, case studies, and analyses related to health status and behavior, as well as to health work force, policy and access issues. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies are welcome. Highest priority is given to manuscripts that reflect scholarly quality, demonstrate methodological rigor, and emphasize practical implications. The journal also publishes articles with an international rural health perspective, commentaries, book reviews and letters.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信