7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Association Between Telemedicine Use in Nonmetropolitan Counties and Quality of Care Received by Medicare Beneficiaries With Serious Mental Illness

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Is there an association between greater telemedicine use in a nonmetropolitan county and quality measures including use of specialty mental health care and medication adherence?

          Findings

          In this cohort study including 118 670 patients with schizophrenia or related psychotic disorders and/or bipolar I disorder, greater use of telemental health visits in a nonmetropolitan county was associated with modest increases in contact with outpatient specialty mental health professionals and greater likelihood of follow-up after hospitalization. However, there were no substantive changes in medication adherence, and there was an increase in mental health hospitalizations.

          Meaning

          The findings of this study suggest that greater use of telemental health service may be associated with quality measures.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Access to specialty mental health care remains challenging for people with serious mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Whether expansion of telemedicine is associated with improved access and quality of care for these patients is unclear.

          Objective

          To assess whether greater telemedicine use in a nonmetropolitan county is associated with quality measures, including use of specialty mental health care and medication adherence.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          In this cohort study, the variable uptake of telemental health visits was examined across a national sample of fee-for-service claims from Medicare beneficiaries in 2916 nonmetropolitan counties between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018. Beneficiaries with schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders and/or bipolar I disorder during the study period were included. For each year of the study, each county was categorized based on per capita telemental health service use (none, low, moderate, and high). The association between telemental health service use in the county and quality measures was tested using a multivariate model controlling for both patient characteristics and county fixed effects. Analyses were conducted from January 1 to April 11, 2022. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine reimbursement was limited to nonmetropolitan beneficiaries.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Receipt of a minimum of 2 specialty mental health service visits (telemedicine or in-person) in the year, number of months per year with medication, hospitalization rate, and outpatient follow-up visits after a mental health hospitalization in a year.

          Results

          In 2018, there were 2916 counties with 118 170 patients (77 068 [65.2%] men; mean [SD] age, 58.3 [15.6] years) in the sample. The fraction of counties that had high telemental health service use increased from 2% in 2010 to 17% in 2018. In 2018 there were 1.08 telemental health service visits per patient in the high telemental health counties. Compared with no telemental health care in the county, patients in high-use counties were 1.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.81-1.60 percentage points) (8.0% relative increase) more likely to have a minimum number of specialty mental health service visits, 13.7 percentage points (95% CI, 5.1-22.3 percentage points) (6.5% relative increase) more likely to have outpatient follow-up within 7 days of a mental health hospitalization, and 0.47 percentage points (95% CI, 0.25-0.69 percentage points) (7.6% relative increase) more likely to be hospitalized in a year. Telemental health service use was not associated with changes in medication adherence.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          The findings of this study suggest that greater use of telemental health visits in a county was associated with modest increases in contact with outpatient specialty mental health care professionals and greater likelihood of follow-up after hospitalization. No substantive changes in medication adherence were noted and an increase in mental health hospitalizations occurred.

          Abstract

          This cohort study examines the use of telemental health visits by persons with serious mental illness in nonmetropolitan counties across the US.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The effectiveness of telemental health: a 2013 review.

          The effectiveness of any new technology is typically measured in order to determine whether it successfully achieves equal or superior objectives over what is currently offered. Research in telemental health-in this article mainly referring to telepsychiatry and psychological services-has advanced rapidly since 2003, and a new effectiveness review is needed. The authors reviewed the published literature to synthesize information on what is and what is not effective related to telemental health. Terms for the search included, but were not limited to, telepsychiatry, effectiveness, mental health, e-health, videoconferencing, telemedicine, cost, access, and international. Telemental health is effective for diagnosis and assessment across many populations (adult, child, geriatric, and ethnic) and for disorders in many settings (emergency, home health) and appears to be comparable to in-person care. In addition, this review has identified new models of care (i.e., collaborative care, asynchronous, mobile) with equally positive outcomes. Telemental health is effective and increases access to care. Future directions suggest the need for more research on service models, specific disorders, the issues relevant to culture and language, and cost.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Usefulness of telepsychiatry: A critical evaluation of videoconferencing-based approaches.

            Telepsychiatry, i.e., the use of information and communication technologies to provide psychiatric services from a distance, has been around for more than half a century now. Research over this period has shown that videoconferencing-based telepsychiatry is an enabling and empowering form of service delivery, which promotes equality of access, and high levels of satisfaction among patients. The range of services offered by videoconferencing-based telepsychiatry, potential users and points of delivery of such services are theoretically limitless. Telepsychiatry has both clinical utility and non-clinical uses such as administrative, learning and research applications. A large body of accumulated evidence indicates that videoconferencing-based telepsychiatric assessments are reliable, and clinical outcomes of telepsychiatric interventions are comparable to conventional treatment among diverse patient populations, ages and diagnostic groups, and on a wide range of measures. However, on many aspects of effectiveness, the evidence base is still relatively limited and often compromised by methodological problems. The lack of cost-effectiveness data in particular, is a major hindrance, raising doubts about the continued viability of telepsychiatric services. Added to this are the vagaries of technology, negative views among clinicians, poor uptake by providers, and several legal, ethical and administrative barriers. These hamper the widespread implementation of telepsychiatry and its integration with routine care. Though further advances in technology and research are expected to solve many of these problems, the way forward would be to promote telepsychiatry as an adjunct to conventional care, and to develop hybrid models, which incorporate both traditional and telepsychiatric forms of mental health-care.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Rapid Growth In Mental Health Telemedicine Use Among Rural Medicare Beneficiaries, Wide Variation Across States.

              Congress and many state legislatures are considering expanding access to telemedicine. To inform this debate, we analyzed Medicare fee-for-service claims for the period 2004-14 to understand trends in and recent use of telemedicine for mental health care, also known as telemental health. The study population consisted of rural beneficiaries with a diagnosis of any mental illness or serious mental illness. The number of telemental health visits grew on average 45.1 percent annually, and by 2014 there were 5.3 and 11.8 telemental health visits per 100 rural beneficiaries with any mental illness or serious mental illness, respectively. There was notable variation across states: In 2014 nine had more than twenty-five visits per 100 beneficiaries with serious mental illness, while four states and the District of Columbia had none. Compared to other beneficiaries with mental illness, beneficiaries who received a telemental health visit were more likely to be younger than sixty-five, be eligible for Medicare because of disability, and live in a relatively poor community. States with a telemedicine parity law and a pro-telemental health regulatory environment had significantly higher rates of telemental health use than those that did not.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                27 June 2022
                June 2022
                27 June 2022
                : 5
                : 6
                : e2218730
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
                [2 ]Stanford University, Stanford, California
                [3 ]McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts
                [4 ]RAND Health, Arlington, Virginia
                [5 ]Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: April 24, 2022.
                Published: June 27, 2022. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.18730
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2022 Wang B et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Ateev Mehrotra, MD, Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, 180 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115 ( mehrotra@ 123456hcp.med.harvard.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Mr Wang had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Wang, Huskamp, Busch, Uscher-Pines, Raja, Mehrotra.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Wang.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Wang, Rose.
                Obtained funding: Huskamp, Uscher-Pines, Mehrotra.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Wang, Busch, Mehrotra.
                Supervision: Wang, Huskamp, Uscher-Pines, Mehrotra.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Mehrotra reported receiving consulting fees from Pew Charitable Trust and Sanofi outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This study was supported by National Institutes of Mental Health grant R01MH112829-02.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funding organization had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Article
                zoi220541
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.18730
                9237790
                35759264
                2f0e1032-49af-411a-b4ee-9261bc163cf2
                Copyright 2022 Wang B et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 18 November 2021
                : 24 April 2022
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Psychiatry

                Comments

                Comment on this article