Read more

May 05, 2023
1 min read
Save

In-person revisit rates similar for ophthalmic telemedicine, in-person care

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Key takeaways:

  • The difference in in-person revisits was not significant between telemedicine and in-person care.
  • Odds for an in-person revisit were higher after a telemedicine visit with optometry or glaucoma.

SAN DIEGO — There was no significant difference in in-person revisit rates for ophthalmic telemedicine compared with in-person care, according to a presenter here.

“We found that less than 7% of telemedicine visits in 2020 led to an in-person revisit within 7 days, a figure that does not seem to be any higher than that of in-person care,” Jade Y. Moon, MD, said at DOS Digital Day at the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery meeting.

Practice management eye diagram
There was no significant difference in in-person revisit rates for ophthalmic telemedicine compared with in-person care, according to a presenter here.
Image: Adobe Stock

Due to concerns about the limitations of virtual eye care, Moon and colleagues conducted a retrospective chart review at a single institution to investigate the rate of in-person revisits within 7 days for ophthalmic telemedicine visits.

Across 2,262 telemedicine encounters, the revisit rate within 7 days of the initial exam, after the removal of unrelated cases, was 6.5%. Without removing unrelated cases, the revisit rate was 7.3% compared with 10.1% among 147,211 in-person encounters.

Jade Moon
Jade Y. Moon

There was no observed difference in revisit rates between exams that were audio based compared with those that were video based, Moon said.

“Previous studies have shown that historically marginalized groups are less likely to utilize video-based telemedicine,” she said. “Our findings reiterate that audio-based telemedicine has an important role in our health care system as we innovate ways to make care more accessible.”

There were significantly higher odds of a revisit after a telemedicine visit with optometry or glaucoma, as well as for patients with government insurance.

“This can at least partially be explained by the fact that at our institution, we set up an urgent hotline that was frequently staffed by optometrists meant to triage patients into or out of the hospital,” Moon said.

Limitations of the study included the lack of clear clinical guidelines for the use of telemedicine in ophthalmology.

“Moving forward, further work to determine costs of revisits could help us identify areas of improvement in the provision of ophthalmic telemedicine, as well as help us establish protocols for assessing which patients and conditions are best suited for ophthalmic telemedicine services,” Moon said.