North American Spine Society Journal (Jun 2023)
Feasibility and acceptability of a telemedicine triage model among Medicaid patients with low back pain referred to a spine center
Abstract
Background: The data for primary triage via telemedicine for spine related conditions are sparse but has potential to improve access, quality of care, and offer significant cost savings for Medicaid insured patients who have very limited access to care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a telehealth triage framework using synchronous video conferencing appointments. Methods: This is a prospective cohort feasibility study conducted within an academic spine center in the United States. Participants include Medicaid insured patients referred to an academic spine center for low back pain. We collected demographic information, a spine red flag survey, a patient satisfaction survey and demand and implementation feasibility metrics. Participants completed a demographic and red-flag survey followed by a telehealth spine appointment with a physiatrist. Immediately after the appointment, the participant completed a satisfaction survey. Results: Nineteen patients met inclusion criteria but declined telehealth either due to preference for in-person appointment or lack of comfort with technology. Thirty-three participants enrolled and attended their initial telehealth appointment. Few participants reporting 1 or more red flag symptom also screened positive during their subsequent telehealth evaluation with the physician (n=7/28). Participant satisfaction was high across all domains including ease of scheduling, efficiency of virtual check in, ability to report their symptoms fully and accurately to the provider, imaging review, explanation of diagnosis and treatment plan. Most participants (n=19/20, 95%) would recommend an initial telehealth appointment. Conclusions: The telehealth framework used was feasible and provided an acceptable form of care for Medicaid patients who were interested and able to participate in this form of care. Our acceptability results are promising but should be interpreted with caution given the proportion of patients who declined to participate.
