4.5 Article

TELEHEALTH ADOPTION AMONG ENDOCRINOLOGISTS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Journal

ENDOCRINE PRACTICE
Volume 26, Issue 8, Pages 846-856

Publisher

ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.4158/EP-2020-0237

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Telehealth is a timely solution for delivering health care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The practice of endocrinology is suited to provide virtual care to patients with a variety of endocrine disorders. In this survey, we aimed to gauge the adoption of telehealth practices during the COVID-19 pandemic among endocrinologists in the United States (U.S.). Methods: This was a cross-sectional, online survey-based study. Members of the Facebook group Endocrinologists were invited to participate in the survey. Characteristics of respondents and their rates of adoption of telehealth were described and analyzed for statistically significant associations using the Pearson chisquare test. Results: A total of 181 physicians responded to the survey. The majority of respondents were females (75%), younger than or equal to 40 years of age (51%), employed (72%) either by a private group/hospital or by an academic setting, worked in an urban area (88.4%), and were adult endocrinologists (93%). With the COVID-19 outbreak, more than two-fifths (44.2%) of participants switched to completely virtual visits, and an additional 44.2% switched to a majority of virtual visits, with some in-person visits in the outpatient setting. Additionally, there was a significantly higher adoption rate of telehealth among endocrinologists younger than or equal to 40 years of age (P =.02) and among those who practiced in northeastern, midwestern, and the western geographic regions of the U.S. (P =.04). Conclusion: The majority of the responding endocrinologists from the U.S. appeared to have swiftly adapted by using telehealth within a few weeks of COVID-19 being declared a national emergency.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available