Amy M J O'Shea, Bjarni Haraldsson, Matthew R Augustine, Ariana Shahnazi, Kailey Mulligan, Peter J Kaboli
{"title":"远程初级保健远程医疗人员配备模式对退伍军人健康管理局初级保健服务的影响。","authors":"Amy M J O'Shea, Bjarni Haraldsson, Matthew R Augustine, Ariana Shahnazi, Kailey Mulligan, Peter J Kaboli","doi":"10.1007/s11606-024-08835-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented the Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program to fill staffing gaps in primary care (PC) clinics via telemedicine and maintain veterans' healthcare access.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate PC wait times before and after CRH implementation.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Comparative interrupted time series analysis among a retrospective observational cohort of PC clinics who did and did not use CRH during pre-implementation (October 2018-September 2019) and post-implementation (October 2019-February 2020) periods.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Clinics completing ≥10 CRH visits per month for 2 consecutive months and propensity matched control clinics.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Two measures of patient access (i.e., established, and new patient wait times) and one measure of clinic capacity (i.e., third next available appointment) were assessed. Clinics using CRH were 1:1 propensity score matched across clinical and demographic characteristics. Comparative interrupted time series models used linear mixed effects regression with random clinic-level intercepts and triple interaction (i.e., CRH use, pre- vs. post-implementation, and time) for trend and point estimations.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>PC clinics using CRH (N = 79) were matched to clinics not using CRH (N = 79). In the 12-month pre-implementation, third next available time increased in CRH clinics (0.16 days/month; 95% CI = [0.07, 0.25]), and decreased in the 5 months post-implementation (-0.58 days/month; 95% CI = [-0.90, -0.27]). Post-implementation third next available time also decreased in control clinics (-0.48 days/month; 95% CI = [-0.81, -0.17]). Comparative differences remained non-significant. There were no statistical differences in established or new patient wait times by CRH user status, CRH implementation, or over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a national VHA telemedicine program developed to provide gap coverage for PC clinics, no wait time differences were observed between clinics using and not using CRH services. This hub-and-spoke telemedicine service is an effective model to provide gap coverage while maintaining access. Further investigation of quality and long-term access remains necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":15860,"journal":{"name":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2771-2779"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11535148/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of a Remote Primary Care Telehealth Staffing Model on Primary Care Access in the Veterans Health Administration.\",\"authors\":\"Amy M J O'Shea, Bjarni Haraldsson, Matthew R Augustine, Ariana Shahnazi, Kailey Mulligan, Peter J Kaboli\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11606-024-08835-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented the Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program to fill staffing gaps in primary care (PC) clinics via telemedicine and maintain veterans' healthcare access.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate PC wait times before and after CRH implementation.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Comparative interrupted time series analysis among a retrospective observational cohort of PC clinics who did and did not use CRH during pre-implementation (October 2018-September 2019) and post-implementation (October 2019-February 2020) periods.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Clinics completing ≥10 CRH visits per month for 2 consecutive months and propensity matched control clinics.</p><p><strong>Main measures: </strong>Two measures of patient access (i.e., established, and new patient wait times) and one measure of clinic capacity (i.e., third next available appointment) were assessed. Clinics using CRH were 1:1 propensity score matched across clinical and demographic characteristics. Comparative interrupted time series models used linear mixed effects regression with random clinic-level intercepts and triple interaction (i.e., CRH use, pre- vs. post-implementation, and time) for trend and point estimations.</p><p><strong>Key results: </strong>PC clinics using CRH (N = 79) were matched to clinics not using CRH (N = 79). In the 12-month pre-implementation, third next available time increased in CRH clinics (0.16 days/month; 95% CI = [0.07, 0.25]), and decreased in the 5 months post-implementation (-0.58 days/month; 95% CI = [-0.90, -0.27]). Post-implementation third next available time also decreased in control clinics (-0.48 days/month; 95% CI = [-0.81, -0.17]). Comparative differences remained non-significant. There were no statistical differences in established or new patient wait times by CRH user status, CRH implementation, or over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a national VHA telemedicine program developed to provide gap coverage for PC clinics, no wait time differences were observed between clinics using and not using CRH services. This hub-and-spoke telemedicine service is an effective model to provide gap coverage while maintaining access. Further investigation of quality and long-term access remains necessary.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15860,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of General Internal Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2771-2779\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11535148/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of General Internal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-024-08835-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of General Internal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-024-08835-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Impact of a Remote Primary Care Telehealth Staffing Model on Primary Care Access in the Veterans Health Administration.
Background: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented the Clinical Resource Hub (CRH) program to fill staffing gaps in primary care (PC) clinics via telemedicine and maintain veterans' healthcare access.
Objective: To evaluate PC wait times before and after CRH implementation.
Design: Comparative interrupted time series analysis among a retrospective observational cohort of PC clinics who did and did not use CRH during pre-implementation (October 2018-September 2019) and post-implementation (October 2019-February 2020) periods.
Participants: Clinics completing ≥10 CRH visits per month for 2 consecutive months and propensity matched control clinics.
Main measures: Two measures of patient access (i.e., established, and new patient wait times) and one measure of clinic capacity (i.e., third next available appointment) were assessed. Clinics using CRH were 1:1 propensity score matched across clinical and demographic characteristics. Comparative interrupted time series models used linear mixed effects regression with random clinic-level intercepts and triple interaction (i.e., CRH use, pre- vs. post-implementation, and time) for trend and point estimations.
Key results: PC clinics using CRH (N = 79) were matched to clinics not using CRH (N = 79). In the 12-month pre-implementation, third next available time increased in CRH clinics (0.16 days/month; 95% CI = [0.07, 0.25]), and decreased in the 5 months post-implementation (-0.58 days/month; 95% CI = [-0.90, -0.27]). Post-implementation third next available time also decreased in control clinics (-0.48 days/month; 95% CI = [-0.81, -0.17]). Comparative differences remained non-significant. There were no statistical differences in established or new patient wait times by CRH user status, CRH implementation, or over time.
Conclusions: In a national VHA telemedicine program developed to provide gap coverage for PC clinics, no wait time differences were observed between clinics using and not using CRH services. This hub-and-spoke telemedicine service is an effective model to provide gap coverage while maintaining access. Further investigation of quality and long-term access remains necessary.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of General Internal Medicine is the official journal of the Society of General Internal Medicine. It promotes improved patient care, research, and education in primary care, general internal medicine, and hospital medicine. Its articles focus on topics such as clinical medicine, epidemiology, prevention, health care delivery, curriculum development, and numerous other non-traditional themes, in addition to classic clinical research on problems in internal medicine.