Parameswaran, Vijaya

e13890 Background: Many oncology practices have reported continued use of telemedicine since onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the future sustainability of telemedicine within oncology practices remains unclear, particularly because federal policies that enabled adoption in response to the public health emergency (PHE) have not been made permanent. Understanding similarities and differences in telemedicine utilization at high-volume oncology centers is crucial for shaping evidence-based policy that enables equitable access to oncology care across varying geographies. Methods: This is a cross-sectional, year-over-year, retrospective cohort analysis of trends in telemedicine utilization across all medical oncology clinical appointments conducted among adult patients (age >18) from January 2019 to December 2023 at Stanford Medicine Cancer Center (SM) – comprising multiple campuses in the California Bay Area – and the Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center (MC) – a multiregional cancer practice with tertiary referral campuses in Minnesota, Florida, and Arizona, as well as community-based clinics throughout the Upper Midwest. Results: Both institutions exhibited a similar trend in telemedicine adoption over time. This was characterized by an initial surge in utilization following the PHE declaration in March 2020, followed by sustained utilization rates from 2021 to 2023. However, telemedicine use as a proportion of the overall practice differed significantly between institutions. At SM, the rate of telemedicine visits as a proportion of overall clinical practice was 60.3% (49,136/ 81,502) in 2021, 59.9% (52,247/ 87,215) in 2022, and 57.2% (55,007/ 96,163) in 2023. At MC, the proportion of telemedicine utilization was 12.8% in 2021 (23,873/186,086), 14.7% in 2022 (28,985/196,777), and 14.0% in 2023 (30,208/215,941). Deployment in the setting of new versus return visits also differed between institutions. In 2023, telemedicine accounted for 53.7% (6,440/11,998) of new and 57.7% (48,567/84,165) of return visits at SM, compared to 15.5% (3,359/21,728) and 13.8% (26,849/194,213) at MC. Additionally, while video visits were the predominant modality used to conduct telemedicine visits at both institutions from 2021 onward, in 2023 phone visits still made up 17.9% (5,394/30,208) of all telemedicine visits at MC, compared to just 5.4% (2,990/55,007) at SM. Conclusions: Stanford Medicine and Mayo Clinic exhibited a pattern of initial growth of telemedicine adoption in 2020, followed by sustained utilization from 2021-2023. We observed unique differences in the overall proportion, visit type deployment, and modality of telemedicine utilization between institutions. However, this study confirms telemedicine visits have remained a fixture of medical oncology care for many patients at these institutions since the COVID-19 pandemic.

e23345 Background: Telemedicine enables patients to attend visits remotely and is associated with shorter wait times (i.e. scheduling-to-appointment duration). However, its impact on patient–clinic distance and wait times for new patients in high-volume surgical oncology centers remains unclear. In these centers, where appointment availability and travel distance significantly influence care decisions, understanding telemedicine’s impact on access is essential as federal policies supporting telemedicine continue to be under legislative review. To address this, we examined the relationship between new patient visit modality, distance, and wait time across demographics, providing insights to guide policy makers, and clinical practice. Methods: We extracted visit data from a multispecialty surgical oncology center in Northern California from 2019 to 2023 and used linear models with fixed effects for clinician and patient characteristics to assess the association of NPV modality with distance and wait times. We calculated distance using geodesic measurements between residential ZIP codes and care sites and derived median household income and education levels from the American Community Survey. Results: There were 10596 NPVs in 2019, and 13982 in 2023, conducted by 78 and 100 clinicians respectively. The proportion of NPV visits conducted by telemedicine increased from 0% to 28% during this period. From 2021–2023, NPVs conducted by telemedicine were more likely to fall outside the center’s 2019 catchment area (80th percentile of distance) with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.89 (95% CI 1.62, 2.21). Wait times for telemedicine NPVs was 3.0 days shorter (95% CI [2.0, 3.9]) than in-person visits. Compared to the reduction in wait times for patients aged 45–65 (2.8 days, 95% CI [1.8, 3.8]), those 80 and older had a smaller reduction (1.9 days, 95% CI [0.9, 2.8]), while patients aged 65–79 had a greater reduction (3.4 days, 95% CI [2.4, 4.5]). This effect did not significantly vary by sex, race, ethnicity, education, income, or insurance status. Conclusions: At this multispecialty surgical oncology center, new patients seen via telemedicine were more likely to reside outside the center’s traditional catchment area and had shorter wait times, with these differences varying by demographic characteristics. Strategic telemedicine integration tailored to patient needs could enhance access by reducing wait times and expanding specialized surgical oncology care to patients across broader geographic distances.