Telehealth utilization in neuro-oncology: A single institution experience.
Abstract
e13893 Background: For individuals with CNS tumors who have experience difficulties with in-person (IP) evaluations due to disease-related neurologic disability or the costs associated with travel, telehealth (TH) offers a convenient and timely alternative for accessing specialized neuro-oncology care. We report our institution’s experience with telehealth utilization in neuro-oncology. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who had at least one neuro-oncology telehealth visit between August 2021 and May 2024 at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Reasons for visits, outcomes of appointments, acute care utilization following visits was reviewed. Results: A total of 660 patients who had at least one TH visit between August 2021 and May 2024 were included in the analysis. Median age was 56 (range 20-98), 49% were female, and 92% were white. Most patients resided in the US Midwest (84%), followed by the South (8%), West (5%), Northeast (1%), and US Territories (< 1%). Less than two percent were international patients. The most common primary visit diagnosis was glioblastoma (GBM, 26%), followed by astrocytoma, IDH-mutant (17%), meningioma (17%), oligodendroglioma, IDH-mutant, 1p/19q codeleted (7%). Of 6657 visits reviewed, 2745 (41%) were conducted via TH. Telehealth visits served various purposes, including consultation for newly diagnosed tumors or abnormal MRIs (n = 26), second opinion for an established tumor diagnosis (n = 119), discussion about clinical trial participation (n = 108), tumor-related treatment discussions (n = 719), chemotherapy education (n = 161), new symptom assessment (n = 117), symptom management (n = 366), and tumor surveillance (n = 1694). Outcomes from telehealth visits included enrollment in clinical trials (n = 28), proceeding with tumor-directed surgery (n = 46), initiation of radiation therapy (n = 88), starting or changing systemic therapy (n = 377), continuing existing systemic therapy (n = 932), transition to supportive care (n = 45), tumor diagnostic workup (n = 28), continuation of tumor surveillance (n = 1254). Acute care utilization, defined as an emergency department visit or hospitalization within one month of an appointment, was the same following telehealth visits compared to in-person visits (6.9% for IP vs 5% for TH, p = 0.507). Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that telehealth can effectively support all aspects of neuro-oncology care, ranging from initial diagnosis discussions to systemic therapy management and transitions to supportive care. Telehealth offers a convenient and accessible method of care delivery option for patients faced with neurologic illness. Additionally, THs do not lead to increased acute care utilization compared to IP evaluations.
Article Details
Journal Info
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Authors (20)
Hazal Ser
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Taylor Galloway
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Duru Baykal
Mayo Clinic Hospital Rochester, Rochester, MN
Amna Hassan
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Allison Valerius
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Jian Li Campian
Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Ivan D Carabenciov
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Sani Haider Kizilbash
Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN
Daniel Honore Lachance
Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN
Samantha Caron
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Jamecca Jones
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Jenna L. Burckhard
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Summer Markey
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Michael W. Ruff
Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN
Joon H. Uhm
Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN
Bryan Neth
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Jonas Paludo
1Mayo Clinic, Rochester, United States
Tufia C. Haddad
Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN
Joshua C Pritchett
Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Ugur Sener
Division of Neurology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, MN