Abstract
Background The dearth of specialized healthcare services contributes to the ongoing HIV epidemic. Telemedicine (TM) is a potential tool to improve HIV care, but little is known about its effectiveness when compared to traditional (face-to-face) (F2F) care in rural populations. The objective of this study is to examine the effectiveness of HIV care delivered through TM compared to F2F care.
Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of a subset of HIV patients who attended TM clinic in Dublin Georgia, and conventional F2F clinic in Augusta, Georgia between May 2017 to April 2018. All TM patients were matched to F2F patients based on gender, age, and race. HIV Viral Load (VL) and gain in CD4 counts were compared using T-test and Snedecor Statistics.
Results 385 patients were included in the analyses (F2F=200, TM=185). Mean CD4 in the TM group was higher (643.9 cells/mm3) than the F2F group (596.3 cells/mm3) (p< 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in VL reduction and control. Thirty-eight of eighty-five patients with detectable VL achieved viral suppression during the study period (F2F = 24/54, TM =14/31), with a mean change of −3.34 × 104 and −1.24 × 104 respectively, p = 1.00. Mean VL was F2F = 416.8 cp/ml, TM = 713.4 cp/ml, p = 0.3.
Conclusion TM was associated with outcome measures comparable to F2F. Increased access to specialty HIV care through TM can facilitate HIV control in communities with limited healthcare access in rural US. Rigorous prospective evaluation of TM for HIV care effectiveness is warranted.
Article Summary Telemedicine can be useful in improving access to specialist outpatient care for HIV and other chronic diseases, in remote communities with limited resources. Telemedicine can lead to similar outcomes when compared to traditional face-to-face outpatient consultations. This is especially true currently with COVID-19.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding received for this project.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Institutional Review Board - Augusta University
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding: None
Data Availability
No external datasets in online repositories.
