This poster highlighting remote tele-ID was originally presented at IDWeek 2022, held Oct. 19-23 in Washington, D.C.
Sowmya Nanjappa, M.D.1,2; Peter Volpe, M.D.1,2; Nupur Gupta, DO MPH1,2; Sui Kwong Li, M.D.1,2;
Christian Perez. M.D.1,2; Kate Gass, BSN1; John W. Mellors. M.D.1,2; Rima C. Abdel-Massih, M.D.1,2
Contact: nanjappas@upmc.edu
1. Division of Infectious Diseases, UPMC 2. Infectious Disease Connect, Pittsburgh PA USA
Conclusions
Based upon the findings of this study, remote Tele-ID care is a viable solution where access to ID expertise is limited
- A Tele-ID service with daily availability increased appropriate utilization of ID care at a 150+-bed community hospital.
- Despite higher Charleston Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores in Tele-ID patients, length of stay (LOS) was shorter and discharge on intravenous (IV) antibiotics was less frequent when compared to In-person service and showed no difference in ID related readmissions or in-house mortality.
Background
- Access to ID specialists is absent in most U.S. counties.
- Remote access to ID specialists via telemedicine is a potential alternative to in-person ID care.
- As comparative data is lacking, we compared outcomes between periodic in-person and daily remote ID care.
Methods
- Physicians performed a retrospective electronic health record (EHR) analysis of 200 patients at a 164-bed community hospital, which historically had access to some in-person ID specialists every third day with limited telephonic follow-up.
- In May of 2020, access to a team of Tele-ID specialists was provided through live audio-visual and e-consults, with telephonic consults after-hours and on weekends.
- Outcomes for 100 consecutive patients cared for in-person from 01/2019 to 11/2019 were compared to the first IOO patients cared for via Tele-ID from 05/2020 to 08/2020.
Results
- Of the 100 patients seen via Tele-ID, 73 were live initial consults and 27 initial e-consults. Most patients were Caucasian, male, and >60 years old (Table 1).
- These 100 consults occurred over four months compared with 11 months for the 100 in-person ID consults, revealing greater utilization of Tele-ID services. Additionally, Tele-ID patients had: (Table 2):
- Significantly higher CCI scores (5.3 vs 4.S, p=O.047)
- Shorter LOS (7.S vs 9.08 days, p=0.003)
- Less frequent discharges with IV antibiotics (34% vs S1%, p=0.007)
- More frequent discharges on oral antibiotics (39% vs 23%, p=0.014
- No significant differences in the frequency of transfers to tertiary care (13% vs 14%, p=0.84) or in-hospital mortality (2% vs 2%)
- While only one readmission for a patient who received Tele-ID care was ID-related (a new C.difficile infection), the 30-day readmission rate was higher for Tele-ID (11% vs l%, p<0.0l).
- The diversity of ID diagnoses made under Tele-ID and in-person care was not different (Figure 1).
Table 1: Patient Demographics
| In-Person ID Service | Tele-ID Service | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Encounters | 100 | 100 | |
| Mean age (years) | 63.59 | 67.84 | 0.0553 |
| Caucasian (%) | 100 | 98 | 1.552 |
| Female (%) | 41 | 44 | 0.668 |
| CCI score (mean) | 4.5 | 5.3 | 0.047 |
Table 2: Outcomes
| In-Person ID Service | Tele-ID Service | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average LOS (days) | 9.08 | 7.5 | 0.003 |
| Discharge on IV antibiotics (%) | 51 | 34 | 0.007 |
| Discharge on PO antibiotics (%) | 23 | 39 | 0.014 |
| Transfer to tertiary care center (%) | 14 | 13 | 0.84 |
| In-house mortality (%) | 2 | 2 | – |
| 3O-Day readmission (%) | 1 | 11 | 0.007 |
Acknowledgements / References / Disclosures
Sowmya Nanjappa, Peter Volpe, Nupur Gupta, Sui Kwong Li & Christian Perez have no disclosures. Rima Abdel-Massih is Co-founder, CMO, and share option holder of Infectious Disease Connect. John Mellors is Co-founder, Advisory Board chair, and share option holder of Infectious Disease Connect.
You might also like…
ID Connect to Share Key Insights and Data at IDWeek 2024
Infectious Disease Connect and UNM SRMC Release Groundbreaking White Paper on Telemedicine’s Impact on Infectious Disease Care
ID Connect Named “Telehealth Company to Know” by Becker’s Hospital Review