Richard C Wang, Daniel I Lipin, Thomas K Swoboda, Usha Sambamoorthi
{"title":"使用和未使用远程医疗的不同弱势群体对医疗质量看法的比较分析：来自全国健康信息趋势调查的横断面研究。","authors":"Richard C Wang, Daniel I Lipin, Thomas K Swoboda, Usha Sambamoorthi","doi":"10.1007/s40615-024-02116-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rapid expansion of telehealth utilization in medicine. However, the quality measures associated with telehealth use remain unclear, particularly among vulnerable populations. This study aims to investigate the impact of telehealth on individuals' perception of overall quality care among vulnerable patient populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study utilized Health Information National Trends Survey data. The individuals' overall perception of healthcare quality was compared between populations that had at least one telehealth visit and non-telehealth users, who all had the option of utilizing telehealth. This comparison focused on vulnerable populations, considering differences in race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic white vs. non-Hispanic black/Hispanic individuals) and socioeconomic status (high vs. low). Multivariable logistic regressions were employed to ascertain the association between individuals' overall perceptions of quality care with and without telehealth utilization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2920 participants, representing an unweighted population of 114,608,302, were analyzed. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for at least one telehealth visit associated with individuals' overall perception of quality care among the entire survey population was 0.76 with a 95% CI of 0.51-1.13 (p = 0.173). The AOR was 0.83 (95% CI 0.39-1.77, p = 0.618) among the non-White population, and the AOR was 0.71 (95% CI 0.29-1.78, p = 0.462) among individuals with low SES.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although telehealth utilization has both its limitations and advantages compared to traditional clinical visits, no statistically significant differences in individuals' overall perception of quality care were identified among telehealth and non-telehealth users. These findings were also consistent across various vulnerable populations.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Analysis of Healthcare Quality Perception Among Different Vulnerable Populations with and without Telehealth Utilization: A Cross-Sectional Study from the Health Information National Trends Survey.\",\"authors\":\"Richard C Wang, Daniel I Lipin, Thomas K Swoboda, Usha Sambamoorthi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40615-024-02116-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rapid expansion of telehealth utilization in medicine. However, the quality measures associated with telehealth use remain unclear, particularly among vulnerable populations. This study aims to investigate the impact of telehealth on individuals' perception of overall quality care among vulnerable patient populations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study utilized Health Information National Trends Survey data. The individuals' overall perception of healthcare quality was compared between populations that had at least one telehealth visit and non-telehealth users, who all had the option of utilizing telehealth. This comparison focused on vulnerable populations, considering differences in race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic white vs. non-Hispanic black/Hispanic individuals) and socioeconomic status (high vs. low). Multivariable logistic regressions were employed to ascertain the association between individuals' overall perceptions of quality care with and without telehealth utilization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2920 participants, representing an unweighted population of 114,608,302, were analyzed. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for at least one telehealth visit associated with individuals' overall perception of quality care among the entire survey population was 0.76 with a 95% CI of 0.51-1.13 (p = 0.173). The AOR was 0.83 (95% CI 0.39-1.77, p = 0.618) among the non-White population, and the AOR was 0.71 (95% CI 0.29-1.78, p = 0.462) among individuals with low SES.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although telehealth utilization has both its limitations and advantages compared to traditional clinical visits, no statistically significant differences in individuals' overall perception of quality care were identified among telehealth and non-telehealth users. These findings were also consistent across various vulnerable populations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-024-02116-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-024-02116-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的：COVID-19 大流行导致远程医疗在医疗领域的应用迅速扩大。然而，与远程医疗使用相关的质量衡量标准仍不明确，尤其是在弱势人群中。本研究旨在调查远程医疗对弱势患者群体中个人对整体医疗质量感知的影响：这项横断面研究利用了全国健康信息趋势调查数据。对至少进行过一次远程医疗就诊的人群与非远程医疗用户（他们都可以选择使用远程医疗）的个人对医疗质量的总体感知进行了比较。这种比较侧重于弱势人群，考虑了种族和民族（非西班牙裔白人与非西班牙裔黑人/西班牙裔个人）以及社会经济地位（高与低）的差异。研究采用了多变量逻辑回归法，以确定使用和未使用远程医疗的个人对优质医疗服务的总体看法之间的关联：共对 2920 名参与者进行了分析，他们代表了 114,608,302 名未加权人口。在整个调查人群中，至少一次远程医疗就诊与个人对医疗质量的总体感知相关的调整赔率（AOR）为 0.76，95% CI 为 0.51-1.13（P = 0.173）。在非白人人群中，AOR 为 0.83（95% CI 0.39-1.77，p = 0.618），在社会经济地位低的人群中，AOR 为 0.71（95% CI 0.29-1.78，p = 0.462）：尽管与传统的临床就诊相比，远程医疗的使用既有其局限性，也有其优势，但在个人对医疗质量的总体感知方面，远程医疗用户与非远程医疗用户之间并无统计学意义上的显著差异。这些发现在不同的弱势人群中也是一致的。
A Comparative Analysis of Healthcare Quality Perception Among Different Vulnerable Populations with and without Telehealth Utilization: A Cross-Sectional Study from the Health Information National Trends Survey.
Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic led to a rapid expansion of telehealth utilization in medicine. However, the quality measures associated with telehealth use remain unclear, particularly among vulnerable populations. This study aims to investigate the impact of telehealth on individuals' perception of overall quality care among vulnerable patient populations.
Methods: This cross-sectional study utilized Health Information National Trends Survey data. The individuals' overall perception of healthcare quality was compared between populations that had at least one telehealth visit and non-telehealth users, who all had the option of utilizing telehealth. This comparison focused on vulnerable populations, considering differences in race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic white vs. non-Hispanic black/Hispanic individuals) and socioeconomic status (high vs. low). Multivariable logistic regressions were employed to ascertain the association between individuals' overall perceptions of quality care with and without telehealth utilization.
Results: A total of 2920 participants, representing an unweighted population of 114,608,302, were analyzed. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) for at least one telehealth visit associated with individuals' overall perception of quality care among the entire survey population was 0.76 with a 95% CI of 0.51-1.13 (p = 0.173). The AOR was 0.83 (95% CI 0.39-1.77, p = 0.618) among the non-White population, and the AOR was 0.71 (95% CI 0.29-1.78, p = 0.462) among individuals with low SES.
Conclusions: Although telehealth utilization has both its limitations and advantages compared to traditional clinical visits, no statistically significant differences in individuals' overall perception of quality care were identified among telehealth and non-telehealth users. These findings were also consistent across various vulnerable populations.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
