Yvonne Jonk PhD, Heidi O'Connor MS, Sharita Thomas MPP, Chrisopher M. Shea PhD
{"title":"在COVID-19突发公共卫生事件期间,重症医院和短期急症护理医院提供的远程行为卫生服务","authors":"Yvonne Jonk PhD, Heidi O'Connor MS, Sharita Thomas MPP, Chrisopher M. Shea PhD","doi":"10.1111/jrh.70047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>This study examined how the telehealth (TH) flexibilities introduced during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) affected in-person behavioral health (BH) and tele-behavioral health (TBH) patterns of use among Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries receiving care at critical access hospitals (CAHs) and non-CAH short-term acute care hospitals.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used the 2019–2021 5% Medicare Limited Data Set Outpatient and Carrier files to explore differences in TBH usage trends by hospital type in the pre-pandemic year of 2019 and during the pandemic (2020–2021).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>The percentage of hospitals providing TBH services significantly increased from 2019 to 2020–2021 (CAHs: 9% to 17%–23%; non-CAHs: 3% to 21%–22%). Although CAHs had higher TBH usage rates (i.e., the percentage of BH visits conducted through TH) than non-CAHs in the pre-pandemic period, usage rates among non-CAHs (7%–25%) outpaced CAHs (5%–16%) across all census regions—particularly in the Northeast—during the pandemic. In 2021, non-CAHs were able to sustain the use of TBH at higher levels than CAHs across all census regions except for the South.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>While both CAHs and non-CAHs took advantage of the PHE TH flexibilities and significantly increased the likelihood and levels of TBH services, non-CAHs realized higher TBH usage rates than CAHs. The increase in the use of TBH visits was not enough to curb the decline in in-person BH visits during the pandemic. Given efforts to expand broadband and improve digital literacy in rural areas, TH continues to have great potential to reduce rural–urban BH differences in access to BH services.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50060,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rural Health","volume":"41 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The provision of tele-behavioral health services by critical access hospitals and short-term acute care hospitals during the COVID-19 public health emergency\",\"authors\":\"Yvonne Jonk PhD, Heidi O'Connor MS, Sharita Thomas MPP, Chrisopher M. Shea PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jrh.70047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study examined how the telehealth (TH) flexibilities introduced during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) affected in-person behavioral health (BH) and tele-behavioral health (TBH) patterns of use among Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries receiving care at critical access hospitals (CAHs) and non-CAH short-term acute care hospitals.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We used the 2019–2021 5% Medicare Limited Data Set Outpatient and Carrier files to explore differences in TBH usage trends by hospital type in the pre-pandemic year of 2019 and during the pandemic (2020–2021).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>The percentage of hospitals providing TBH services significantly increased from 2019 to 2020–2021 (CAHs: 9% to 17%–23%; non-CAHs: 3% to 21%–22%). Although CAHs had higher TBH usage rates (i.e., the percentage of BH visits conducted through TH) than non-CAHs in the pre-pandemic period, usage rates among non-CAHs (7%–25%) outpaced CAHs (5%–16%) across all census regions—particularly in the Northeast—during the pandemic. In 2021, non-CAHs were able to sustain the use of TBH at higher levels than CAHs across all census regions except for the South.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>While both CAHs and non-CAHs took advantage of the PHE TH flexibilities and significantly increased the likelihood and levels of TBH services, non-CAHs realized higher TBH usage rates than CAHs. The increase in the use of TBH visits was not enough to curb the decline in in-person BH visits during the pandemic. Given efforts to expand broadband and improve digital literacy in rural areas, TH continues to have great potential to reduce rural–urban BH differences in access to BH services.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rural Health\",\"volume\":\"41 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-04\",\"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.70047\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rural Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jrh.70047","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}
The provision of tele-behavioral health services by critical access hospitals and short-term acute care hospitals during the COVID-19 public health emergency
Purpose
This study examined how the telehealth (TH) flexibilities introduced during the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) affected in-person behavioral health (BH) and tele-behavioral health (TBH) patterns of use among Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries receiving care at critical access hospitals (CAHs) and non-CAH short-term acute care hospitals.
Methods
We used the 2019–2021 5% Medicare Limited Data Set Outpatient and Carrier files to explore differences in TBH usage trends by hospital type in the pre-pandemic year of 2019 and during the pandemic (2020–2021).
Findings
The percentage of hospitals providing TBH services significantly increased from 2019 to 2020–2021 (CAHs: 9% to 17%–23%; non-CAHs: 3% to 21%–22%). Although CAHs had higher TBH usage rates (i.e., the percentage of BH visits conducted through TH) than non-CAHs in the pre-pandemic period, usage rates among non-CAHs (7%–25%) outpaced CAHs (5%–16%) across all census regions—particularly in the Northeast—during the pandemic. In 2021, non-CAHs were able to sustain the use of TBH at higher levels than CAHs across all census regions except for the South.
Conclusions
While both CAHs and non-CAHs took advantage of the PHE TH flexibilities and significantly increased the likelihood and levels of TBH services, non-CAHs realized higher TBH usage rates than CAHs. The increase in the use of TBH visits was not enough to curb the decline in in-person BH visits during the pandemic. Given efforts to expand broadband and improve digital literacy in rural areas, TH continues to have great potential to reduce rural–urban BH differences in access to BH services.
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.