Disparities in minorities' representation in cancer clinical trials have been shown only in adult populations, which suggest that the main causes of these disparities relate to health system‐based barriers, including issues of poverty (lack of insurance), poor access to trials, and an inadequate number of clinical trials. Initiatives that increase the participation of community physicians in cancer clinical research trials and increase low socioeconomic status patients' access to cancer trials will likely ameliorate this problem. Cancer 2008. © 2007 American Cancer Society.

Study Rationale The swift progression of the COVID‐19 pandemic appeared to facilitate the increase in telehealth utilization. However, it is clear neither how telehealth was offered by providers nor how it was used by patients during this time of unusual and rapid change within the health industry. Aim To investigates the telehealth utilization patterns of Medicare beneficiaries during the height of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Methods and Materials A cross‐sectional study design was used to examine the responses of 9686 Medicare beneficiaries to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey, Fall 2020 COVID‐19 Supplement. Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between telehealth offering and beneficiaries' sociodemographic variables. Results Over half (58%) of primary care providers provided telehealth services, while only 26%–28% of specialists did. Less than 8% of Medicare beneficiaries reported that they were unable to obtain care because of COVID‐19. Conclusions This research found that changes in Medicare policy, associated with CMS' declaration of telehealth waivers during the Public Health Emergency (PHE), likely increased the proliferation and utilization of telehealth services during the COVID‐19 pandemic, providing important access to care for certain populations. With the impending conclusion of the PHE, policymakers must 1) ascertain which elements of the new telehealth landscape will be retained, 2) modernize the regulatory, accreditation and reimbursement framework to maintain pace with care model innovation and 3) address disparities in access to broadband connectivity with a particular focus on rural and underserved communities.

No abstract

Background As providers look to scale high-acuity care in the patient home setting, hospital-at-home is becoming more prevalent. The traditional model of hospital-at-home usually relies on care delivery by in-home providers, caring for patients in urban communities through academic medical centers. Our objective is to describe the process and outcomes of Mayo Clinic’s Advanced Care at Home (ACH) program, a hybrid virtual and in-person hospital-at-home model combining a single, virtual provider-staffed command center with a vendor-mediated in-person medical supply chain to simultaneously deliver care to patients living near an urban hospital-at-home command center and patients living in a rural region in a different US state and time zone. Methods A descriptive, retrospective medical records review of all patients admitted to ACH between July 6, 2020, and December 31, 2021. Patients were admitted to ACH from an urban academic medical center in Florida and a rural community hospital in Wisconsin. We collected patient volumes, age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance type, primary hospital diagnosis, 30-day mortality rate, in-program mortality, 30-day readmission rate, rate of return to hospital during acute phase, All Patient Refined-Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRG) Severity of Illness (SOI), and length of stay (LOS) in both the inpatient-equivalent acute phase and post-acute equivalent restorative phase. Results Six hundred and eighty-six patients were admitted to the ACH program, 408 in Florida and 278 in Wisconsin. The most common diagnosis seen were infectious pneumonia (27.0%), septicemia / bacteremia (11.5%), congestive heart failure exacerbation (11.5%), and skin and soft tissue infections (6.3%). Median LOS in the acute phase was 3 days (IQR 2–5) and median stay in the restorative phase was 22 days (IQR 11–26). In-program mortality rate was 0% and 30-day mortality was 0.6%. The mean APR-DRG SOI was 2.9 (SD 0.79) and the 30-day readmission rate was 9.7%. Conclusions The ACH hospital-at-home model was able to provide both high-acuity inpatient-level care and post-acute care to patients in their homes through a single command center to patients in urban and rural settings in two different geographical locations with favorable outcomes of low mortality and hospital readmissions.