Last data update: Dec 02, 2024. (Total: 48272 publications since 2009)
Records 1-3 (of 3 Records) |
Query Trace: McDow KB[original query] |
---|
Trends in Use of Telehealth Among Health Centers During the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, June 26-November 6, 2020.
Demeke HB , Merali S , Marks S , Pao LZ , Romero L , Sandhu P , Clark H , Clara A , McDow KB , Tindall E , Campbell S , Bolton J , Le X , Skapik JL , Nwaise I , Rose MA , Strona FV , Nelson C , Siza C . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2021 70 (7) 240-244 Telehealth can facilitate access to care, reduce risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]), conserve scarce medical supplies, and reduce strain on health care capacity and facilities while supporting continuity of care. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers* expanded telehealth(†) services during the COVID-19 pandemic (1). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services eliminated geographic restrictions and enhanced reimbursement so that telehealth services-enabled health centers could expand telehealth services and continue providing care during the pandemic (2,3). CDC and HRSA analyzed data from 245 health centers that completed a voluntary weekly HRSA Health Center COVID-19 Survey(§) for 20 consecutive weeks to describe trends in telehealth use. During the weeks ending June 26-November 6, 2020, the overall percentage of weekly health care visits conducted via telehealth (telehealth visits) decreased by 25%, from 35.8% during the week ending June 26 to 26.9% for the week ending November 6, averaging 30.2% over the study period. Weekly telehealth visits declined when COVID-19 cases were decreasing and plateaued as cases were increasing. Health centers in the South and in rural areas consistently reported the lowest average percentage of weekly telehealth visits over the 20 weeks, compared with health centers in other regions and urban areas. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, maintaining and expanding telehealth services will be critical to ensuring access to care while limiting exposure to SARS-CoV-2. |
Telehealth Practice Among Health Centers During the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, July 11-17, 2020.
Demeke HB , Pao LZ , Clark H , Romero L , Neri A , Shah R , McDow KB , Tindall E , Iqbal NJ , Hatfield-Timajchy K , Bolton J , Le X , Hair B , Campbell S , Bui C , Sandhu P , Nwaise I , Armstrong PA , Rose MA . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020 69 (50) 1902-1905 Early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, in-person ambulatory health care visits declined by 60% across the United States, while telehealth* visits increased, accounting for up to 30% of total care provided in some locations (1,2). In March 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released updated regulations and guidance changing telehealth provisions during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, including the elimination of geographic barriers and enhanced reimbursement for telehealth services(†) (3-6). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) administers a voluntary weekly Health Center COVID-19 Survey(§) to track health centers' COVID-19 testing capacity and the impact of COVID-19 on operations, patients, and staff. CDC and HRSA analyzed data from the weekly COVID-19 survey completed by 1,009 HRSA-funded health centers (health centers(¶)) for the week of July 11-17, 2020, to describe telehealth service use in the United States by U.S. Census region,** urbanicity,(††) staffing capacity, change in visit volume, and personal protective equipment (PPE) supply. Among the 1,009 health center respondents, 963 (95.4%) reported providing telehealth services. Health centers in urban areas were more likely to provide >30% of health care visits virtually (i.e., via telehealth) than were health centers in rural areas. Telehealth is a promising approach to promoting access to care and can facilitate public health mitigation strategies and help prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory illnesses, while supporting continuity of care. Although CMS's change of its telehealth provisions enabled health centers to expand telehealth by aligning guidance and leveraging federal resources, sustaining expanded use of telehealth services might require additional policies and resources. |
Identification of substance-exposed newborns and neonatal abstinence syndrome using ICD-10-CM - 15 hospitals, Massachusetts, 2017
Goyal S , Saunders KC , Moore CS , Fillo KT , Ko JY , Manning SE , Shapiro-Mendoza C , Gupta M , Romero L , Coy KC , McDow KB , Keaton AA , Sinatra J , Jones K , Alpren C , Barfield WD , Diop H . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020 69 (29) 951-955 Opioid use disorder and neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) increased in Massachusetts from 1999 to 2013 (1,2). In response, in 2016, the state passed a law requiring birth hospitals to report the number of newborns who were exposed to controlled substances to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH)* by mandating monthly reporting of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) diagnostic codes related to maternal dependence on opioids (F11.20) or benzodiazepines (F13.20) and to newborns affected by maternal use of drugs of addiction (P04.49) or experiencing withdrawal symptoms from maternal drugs of addiction (P96.1) separately.(†) MDPH uses these same codes for monthly, real-time crude estimates of NAS and uses P96.1 alone for official NAS state reporting.(§) MDPH requested CDC's assistance in evaluating the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of either maternal or newborn codes to identify substance-exposed newborns, and of newborn exposure codes (both exposure [P04.49] or withdrawal [P96.1]) and the newborn code for withdrawal alone (P96.1) to identify infants with NAS cases related to three exposure scenarios: 1) opioids, 2) opioids or benzodiazepines, and 3) any controlled substance. Confirmed diagnoses of substance exposure and NAS abstracted from linked clinical records for 1,123 infants born in 2017 and their birth mothers were considered the diagnostic standard and were compared against hospital-reported ICD-10-CM codes. For identifying substance-exposed newborns across the three exposure scenarios, the newborn exposure codes had higher sensitivity (range = 31%-61%) than did maternal drug dependence codes (range = 16%-41%), but both sets of codes had high PPV (≥74%). For identifying NAS, for all exposure scenarios, the sensitivity for either newborn code (P04.49 or P96.1) was ≥92% and the PPV was ≥64%; for P96.1 alone the sensitivity was ≥79% and the PPV was ≥92% for all scenarios. Whereas ICD-10-CM codes are effective for NAS surveillance in Massachusetts, they should be applied cautiously for substance-exposed newborn surveillance. Surveillance for substance-exposed newborns using ICD-10-CM codes might be improved by increasing the use of validated substance-use screening tools and standardized facility protocols and improving communication between patients and maternal health and infant health care providers. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:Dec 02, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure