Video Visits as a Substitute for Urological Clinic Visits

Andino, Juan J.; Lingaya, Mark-Anthony; Daignault-Newton, Stephanie; Shah, Parth K.; Ellimoottil, Chad

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether video visits were being used as substitutes to clinic visits prior to COVID-19 at our institution's outpatient urology centers. METHODS: We reviewed 600 established patient video visits completed by 13 urology providers at a tertiary academic center in southeast Michigan. We compared these visits to a random, stratified sample of established patient clinic visits. We assessed baseline demographics and visit characteristics for both groups. We defined our primary outcome (“revisit rate”) as the proportion of additional healthcare evaluation (ie, office, emergency room, hospitalization) by a urology provider within 30 days of the initial encounter. RESULTS: Patients seen by video visit tended to be younger (51 vs 61 years, P <.001), would have to travel further for a clinic appointment (82 vs 68 miles, P <.001), and were more likely to be female (36 vs 28%, P = .001). The most common diagnostic groups evaluated through video visits were nephrolithiasis (40%), oncology (18%) and andrology (14.3%). While the 30-day revisit rates were higher for clinic visits (4.3% vs 7.5%, P = .01) primarily due to previously scheduled appointments, revisits due to medical concerns were similar across both groups (0.5% vs 0.67%; P = .60). CONCLUSIONS: Video visits can be used to deliver care across a broad range of urologic diagnoses and can serve as a substitute for clinic visits.