The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Telephone Care as a Substitute for Routine Clinic Follow-up
Abstract
DESIGN: Randomized trial. SETTING: A primary care clinic. PATIENTS: Four hundred ninety-seven men aged 54 years or older. OBJECTIVE: We examined the hypothesis that substituting clinician-initiated telephone calls (telephone care) for some clinic visits would reduce medical care utilization without adversely affecting patient health. INTERVENTION: Clinicians were asked to double their recommended interval for face-to-face follow-up and schedule three intervening telephone contacts; for control patients, the follow-up interval recommended by their clinician was unchanged. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Use of medical services and health status. RESULTS: During the 2-year follow-up period, 7% of patients withdrew or became unavailable. Telephone-care patients had fewer total clinic visits, scheduled and unscheduled, than usual-care patients (19%, P less than .001). In addition, telephone-care patients had less medication use (14%, P = .006), fewer admissions, and shorter stays in the hospital (28% fewer total hospital days, P = .005), and 41% fewer intensive care unit days (P = .03). Estimated total expenditures for telephone care were 28% less per patient for the 2 years ($1656, P = .004). For the subgroup of patients with fair or poor overall health at the beginning of the study (n = 180), savings were somewhat greater ($1976, P = .01). In this subgroup, improvement in physical function from baseline (P = .02) and a possible reduction in mortality (P = .06) were also observed. CONCLUSION: We conclude that substituting telephone care for selected clinic visits significantly reduces utilization of medical services. For more severely ill patients, the increased contact made possible by telephone care may also improve health status and reduce mortality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework.
Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.89.9.1322 · Cited by 7,217
Organizing Care for Patients with Chronic Illness
Wagner, E. H., Austin, B. T., & Korff, M. V. (1996) · The Milbank Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3350391 · Cited by 2,877
The role of patient care teams in chronic disease management
Wagner, E. H. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7234.569 · Cited by 1,047
Patient Self-Management: A Key to Effectiveness and Efficiency in Care of Chronic Disease
Holman, H., & Lorig, K. (2004) · Public Health Reports® · doi:10.1016/j.phr.2004.04.002 · Cited by 585
Morrison, R. S., & Meier, D. E. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmcp035232 · Cited by 542
Metadata
- Authors
- Wasson, J.
- Venue
- JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1992-04-01
- Volume
- 267
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 1788
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2032315252
- Cited by
- 421
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Telephone Care as a Substitute for Routine Clinic Follow-up. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1992.03480130104033
- The paper
- Wasson, J. (1992). Telephone Care as a Substitute for Routine Clinic Follow-up. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1992.03480130104033
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.