THE IMPACT OF VIDEO VISITS ON MEASURES OF CLINICAL EFFICIENCY AND REIMBURSEMENT.

introductionTelehealth is gaining more attention in multiple specialties, including urology. Video visits in particular have shown high satisfaction and cost-saving for patients. However, there has been little investigation into how video visits compare to traditional clinic visits on measures of clinical efficiency and reimbursement.

methodsOur dataset included 250 video visits of established patients at Michigan Medicine Department of Urology and 250 in-person clinic visits with the same providers completed between July 2016 and July 2017. Information on visit completion and cancellation rates; cycle time (time from check in to check out); reimbursement; and patient out-of-pocket expenses was collected using the electronic medical record and billing data.

resultsCompletion rates were similar between video and clinic visits (58% versus 61%, respectively; p=0.24). Average cycle time for video visits was significantly shorter compared to clinic visits (24 min vs 80 min, respectively; p<0.01). Neither average commercial payer reimbursement (p=0.21) nor average out-of-pocket expense (p=0.22) was statistically different between video and traditional visits. More video visits than clinic visits were billed as level 3 encounters (85% and 63%, respectively, p=0.002).

conclusionsOur study demonstrates that video visits have the potential to reduce the time patients spend on follow-up care without negatively impacting reimbursement rates. However, these visits could reduce average billing levels. These findings suggest that the incorporation of video visits into practice may be more efficient for patients but may also reduce billing levels.