Upper Peninsula Telehealth Network of Michigan

 


Results/Evaluation

 

*   Medical/Clinical Encounters
*   Clinical Encounters
*   Telehome Care
*   Patient Satisfaction

 

 

The graph below represents real time, video conferencing activity for the UPTN from 1995 to present. Home health and store and forward activity data are maintained separately.

Note: From 1995 through 1998 individual events were recorded. 1999 through present the number of connections are reported. The statistics are conservative as not all sties report all activities as independence is fostered.

Contact: dwurth@mgh.org

 

 

dugger.jpg

 

Patient Encounters

The graph below represents patient encounters that represent traditional physician/patient consultations along with other patient services. Some of the other patient services include; Tumor Boards, Family bondings (Neonatal Intensive Care and Acute care), and support groups. It does not include home health or store and forward technology.

Contact: lskrenes@mgh.org

 

 

happy.jpg

 

Clinical Encounters

The graph below represents patient-practitioner consultations. We currently have 21 speciality offices and 60 specialists who have provided telemedicine services to residents in the Upper Peninsula..

 

Contact: smakela@mgh.org

 

hippy.jpg

 

 

Patient Satisfaction Surveys

Patient satisfaction data was collected through phone surveys of telehealth patients from 2001 through 2003. Michigan State University evaluation staff under the direction of Pamela Whitten, PhD, conducted the interviews. Patients were asked to respond on a scale of 1-5 to a series of Likert style questions with 5 begin strongly agree and 1 begin strongly disagree. In addition, comments were solicited in an open-ended format.

 

For further reading or to look at this study in depth, this information is published by: Whitten, P., Adams, I., & Davis, S. (2003). A Success Model: Marquette General Health Systems. Telemedicine Journal and e-Health 9 (1) 41-48.

 

Note: Survey tools are protected by copyright. To request full text or replication of the tools contact Pamela Whitten, PhD, at pwhitten@msu.edu

 

 

Telehome Care

 

During the three-year evaluation period (2001-2003), 49 telehome care patients were interviewed regarding their usage of telehome care services. These patients were diagnosed as CVA, COPD, or CHF. The interviews were administered two weeks after the initiation of service date in order to ensure the patients had had significant time to form a perception of the service.  

 

The surveys consist of eleven open-ended questions and eight close-ended questions.   Patients rated their agreement with the statements from 1, strongly disagree, to 5, strongly agree. As with patient perceptions with traditional clinical telehealth, patients receiving telehome health services were extremely positive in their perceptions.  Patients disagreed in their responses to preferring to be seen in person rather via telehealth and were neutral in their response regarding telehealth only being appropriate for use when a health care professional could not be present.

 

Patients listed a wide range of advantages for telehome health, including:

 

  • Increased access to health care (24%)
  • Increased convenience for patient L 16.5%)
  • Saves travel and/or time for the patient and/or provider (12%)
  • Saves travel and/or time for the patient and/or provider (12%)

 

In regard to disadvantages associated with telehome health, 47% of the respondents stated that there are no disadvantages to utilizing the telehome health services.  

Those listing disadvantages mentioned:

 

Technology issues/quality (22%)

Non-telehealth related (10%)

Lack of physical touch (4%)

 

More than half of the patients felt that telehome health had enabled them to better manage their chronic health conditions.   The majority of respondents, 76% said that "yes" they would like receive telehome health again.  

 

More detailed results are available by contacting Susan Makela Director of Telehealth smakela@mgh.org