Objective: Cellphone ubiquity has increased distracted pedestrian behavior and contributed to growing pedestrian injury rates. A major barrier to large-scale implementation of prevention programs is unavailable information on potential net monetary benefits. We evaluated net economic benefits of StreetBit, a program that reduces distracted pedestrian behavior by sending warnings from intersection-installed Bluetooth beacons to distracted pedestrians smartphones. Methods: Three data sources were used: (1) fatal, severe, non-severe pedestrian injury rates from Alabama electronic crash-reporting-system; (2) expected costs per fatal, severe, non-severe pedestrian injury, including medical cost, value of statistical life, work-loss cost, quality-of-life cost, from CDC; and (3) prevalence of distracted walking from extant literature. We computed and compared estimated monetary costs of distracted walking in Alabama and monetary benefits from implementing StreetBit to reduce pedestrian injuries at intersections. Results: Over 2019-2021, Alabama recorded an annual average of 31 fatal, 83 severe, and 115 non-severe pedestrian injuries in intersections. Expected costs/injury were $11 million, $339,535, and $93,877, respectively. The estimated range of distracted walking prevalence is 25%-40%, and StreetBit demonstrates 19.1% (95%CI: 1.6%-36.0%) reduction. These figures demonstrate potential annual cost savings from using interventions like StreetBit statewide ranging from $18.1-$29 million. Potential costs range from $3,208,600 (beacons at every-fourth urban intersection) to $6,359,200 (every other intersection). Conclusions: Even under the most parsimonious scenario (25% distracted pedestrians; densest beacon placement), StreetBit yields $11.8 million estimated net annual benefit. Existing data sources can be leveraged to predict net monetary benefits of distracted pedestrian interventions like StreetBit and facilitate large-scale intervention adoption.

ObjectiveCellphone ubiquity has increased distracted pedestrian behaviour and contributed to growing pedestrian injury rates. A major barrier to large-scale implementation of prevention programmes is unavailable information on potential monetary benefits. We evaluated net economic societal benefits of StreetBit, a programme that reduces distracted pedestrian behaviour by sending warnings from intersection-installed Bluetooth beacons to distracted pedestrians’ smartphones.MethodsThree data sources were used as follows: (1) fatal, severe, non-severe pedestrian injury rates from Alabama’s electronic crash reporting system; (2) expected costs per fatal, severe, non-severe pedestrian injury—including medical cost, value of statistical life, work-loss cost, quality-of-life cost—from CDC and (3) prevalence of distracted walking from extant literature. We computed and compared estimated monetary costs of distracted walking in Alabama and monetary benefits from implementing StreetBit to reduce pedestrian injuries at intersections.ResultsOver 2019–2021, Alabama recorded an annual average of 31 fatal, 83 severe and 115 non-severe pedestrian injuries in intersections. Expected costs/injury were US$11 million, US$339 535 and US$93 877, respectively. The estimated distracted walking prevalence is 25%–40%, and StreetBit demonstrates 19.1% (95% CI 1.6% to 36.0%) reduction. These figures demonstrate potential annual cost savings from using interventions like StreetBit statewide ranging from US$18.1 to US$29 million. Potential costs range from US$3 208 600 (beacons at every-fourth urban intersection) to US$6 359 200 (every other intersection).ConclusionsEven under the most parsimonious scenario (25% distracted pedestrians; densest beacon placement), StreetBit yields US$11.8 million estimated net annual benefit to society. Existing data sources can be leveraged to predict net monetary benefits of distracted pedestrian interventions like StreetBit and facilitate large-scale intervention adoption.

Background Telehealth can improve access to evidence-based care at a lower cost for patients, especially those living in underserved and remote areas. The barriers to the widespread adoption of telehealth have been well documented in the literature. However, the barriers may not be the same for pediatric patients, who must rely on their parents or guardians to make healthcare decisions. This paper presents some of the leading barriers parents or guardians of pediatric patients report in using telehealth to meet their children’s healthcare needs. Methods This cross-sectional survey was conducted in a tertiary care pediatric ED at a children’s hospital in Alabama between September 2020 to December 2020. The parents or guardians of pediatric patients were asked about their reasons for not using telehealth despite having healthcare needs for their children, whether they canceled or rescheduled healthcare provider visits and facility visits, and whether the child’s health conditions changed over the past three months. Descriptive analyses were conducted that explored the distribution of telehealth use across the variables listed above. Results 597 parents or guardians of pediatric patients participated in the survey, and 578 answered the question of whether they used telehealth or not over the past three months. Of them, 33.1% used telehealth, 54.3% did not, and 12.6% did not have healthcare needs for their child. The leading reason for not using telehealth was that the doctor or health provider did not give them a telehealth option, the second main reason was that they did not know what telehealth is, and the third leading reason was that the parents did not think telehealth would help meet healthcare needs for their child. Conclusions Physicians and policymakers can better serve patients by understanding some of the barriers to telehealth usage. Physicians can routinely ask parents or guardians if they prefer a telehealth visit. Besides creating an environment that makes telehealth adoption easier, policymakers must pay attention to health literacy and health insurance literacy to increase telehealth utilization.

Background Telehealth can improve access to evidence-based care at a lower cost for patients, especially those living in underserved and remote areas. The barriers to the widespread adoption of telehealth have been well documented in the literature. However, the barriers may not be the same for pediatric patients, who must rely on their parents or guardians to make healthcare decisions. This paper presents some of the leading barriers parents or guardians of pediatric patients report in using telehealth to meet their children’s healthcare needs. Methods This cross-sectional survey was conducted in a tertiary care pediatric Emergency Department (ED) at a children’s hospital in Alabama between September 2020 to December 2020. The parents or guardians of pediatric patients were asked about their reasons for not using telehealth despite having healthcare needs for their children, whether they canceled or rescheduled healthcare provider visits and facility visits, and whether the child’s health conditions changed over the past three months. Descriptive analyses were conducted that explored the distribution of telehealth use across the variables listed above. Results Five hundred ninety-seven parents or guardians of pediatric patients participated in the survey, and 578 answered the question of whether they used telehealth or not over the past three months. Of them, 33.1% used telehealth, 54.3% did not, and 12.6% did not have healthcare needs for their child. The leading reason for not using telehealth was that the doctor or health provider did not give them a telehealth option, the second main reason was that they did not know what telehealth is, and the third leading reason was that the parents did not think telehealth would help meet healthcare needs for their child. Conclusions This study highlights the telehealth utilization barriers among underserved pediatric populations, including the need for physicians to proactively offer telehealth options to parents or guardians of pediatric patients. Improving health literacy is of paramount importance, given that a substantial proportion of parents were not familiar with telehealth. Policymakers and healthcare organizations should raise awareness about the benefits of telehealth which can improve healthcare access for underserved pediatric patients.

During the early days and months of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare facilities experienced a slump in non-COVID-related visits, and there was an increasing interest in telehealth to deliver healthcare services for adult and pediatric patients. The study investigated telehealth use variation by race/ethnicity and place of residence for the pediatric enrollees of the Alabama Medicaid program. This retrospective observational study examined Alabama Medicaid claims data from March to December 2020 for enrollees less than 19 years. There were 637,792 pediatric enrollees in the Alabama Medicaid program during the study period, and 16.9% of them had used telehealth to meet healthcare needs. This study employed a multivariate Poisson mixed-effects model with robust error variance to obtain differences in telehealth utilization and found that Non-Hispanic Black children were 80% as likely, Hispanic children were 55% as likely, and Asian Children were 46% as likely to have used telehealth compared to Non-Hispanic White children. Pediatric enrollees in large rural areas and isolated areas were significantly less likely (IRR: 0.90 for both, p<0.05) to use telehealth than those in urban areas. This study’s findings suggest that attention needs to be paid to addressing race/ethnicity disparities in accessing telehealth services.