Momentum is gathering for telemedicine, which could alleviate a longstanding problem: wait times.
By Austin Frakt
The New York Times, November 23, 2020
The pandemic may present an opportunity to reshape the future of emergency medicine.
The coronavirus has already prompted health care leaders to rethink how to deliver care to make the most of available resources, both physical and digital. If the shift to greater use of telemedicine continues after the pandemic, it could reduce reliance on the emergency room, where crowding has long been a problem.
This could happen if telemedicine increases the ability for doctors to see more patients more quickly.
Of course, telemedicine isnāt a solution for every health problem. And patients with limited digital fluency and access may get left behind as reliance on telemedicine grows. But the potential payoff is large: A review of medical records of older patients found that 27 percent of emergency room visits could have been replaced with telemedicine.
On average, a patient visiting an emergency room will wait about 40 minutes. Although thatās down from about an hour a decade ago, 17 percent of patients visiting an emergency department in 2017 waited over an hour. About 2.5 percent waited more than two and a half hours.
As many studies have documented, longer wait times can be harmful. Longer waits can also increase costs.
Additionally, many people end up waiting in the emergency department on the advice of other medical providers, though they may not need to. Their problems could be handled elsewhere.
Once the pandemic fades, the momentum from telemedicine may continue, with the possibility of making progress on a problem that shouldnāt wait.
NYT Reader Comment:
By Don McCanne, M.D.
How should an acute problem be managed? By telephone? By telemedicine? By an urgent primary care office visit? By an urgent care center? By an emergency department? Should a private insurance company be dictating the approach? Should a less appropriate approach be dictated by the source of payment whether due to a lack of insurance or through very high deductibles, or due to restrictions of provider networks established by private insurers?
Sorting these approaches through triage based on clinical circumstances can improve the efficiency of our health care system, but it would be far more effective if we remove one important stumbling block: disrupting entrance into the health care system based on our dysfunctional, fragmented system of financing health care.
If we had a well designed, single payer improved Medicare for All system that removed the dictates of private insurance bureaucrats, with their provider networks and prior authorization requirements, then we could improve the flow within our health care delivery system, obtaining the appropriate care at the appropriate place at the appropriate time for the appropriate patient. Addition of the option of telemedicine can only improve this flow when it is appropriate for the clinical circumstances.
Stay informed! VisitĀ www.pnhp.org/qotdĀ to sign up for daily email updates.