Cited by 81Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealthcare Systems and TechnologyEmergency and Acute Care Studies

Barriers and Facilitators to Pediatric Emergency Telemedicine in the United States

Open access
Uscher-Pines, Lori, Kahn, Jeremy M.·2014·Telemedicine and e-Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pediatric emergency telemedicine has the potential to improve the quality of pediatric emergency care in underserved areas, reducing socioeconomic disparities in access to care. Yet, telemedicine in the pediatric emergency setting remains underutilized. We aimed to assess the current state of pediatric emergency telemedicine and identify unique success factors and barriers to widespread use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a telephone survey of current, former, and planned pediatric emergency telemedicine programs in the United States. RESULTS: We surveyed 25 respondents at 20 unique sites, including 12 current, 5 planned, and 3 closed programs. Existing programs were located primarily in academic medical centers and served an average of 12.5 spoke sites (range, 1-30). Respondents identified five major barriers, including difficulties in cross-hospital credentialing, integration into established workflows, usability of technology, lack of physician buy-in, and misaligned incentives between patients and providers. Uneven reimbursement was also cited as a barrier, although this was not seen as major because most programs were able to operate independent of reimbursement, and many were not actively seeking reimbursement even when allowed. Critical success factors included selecting spoke hospitals based on receptivity rather than perceived need and cultivating clinical champions at local sites. CONCLUSIONS: Although pediatric emergency telemedicine confronts many of the same challenges of other telemedicine applications, reimbursement is relatively less significant, and workflow disruption are relatively more significant in this setting. Although certain challenges such as credentialing can be addressed with available policy options, others such as the culture of transfer at rural emergency departments require innovative approaches.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/tmj.2014.0015

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Uscher-Pines, L., & Kahn, J. M.
Affiliations
  • RAND Corporation
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Venue
Telemedicine and e-Health
Published
2014-11
Volume
20
Issue
11
Pages
990-996
ISSN
  • 1530-5627 (ISSN-L)
  • 1556-3669
OpenAlex
W1986899721
Cited by
81
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3
FWCI
5.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Telemedicine Journal and e-Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Pittsburgh
  • Health Resources and Services Administration
  • U.S. Public Health Service (H3AMC24076)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
Keywords
telehealth adoption barriers, success factors, workflow integration, technology usability, physician buy-in, reimbursement, clinical champions, rural emergency departments, underserved areas
MeSH terms
Diffusion of Innovation, Emergency Medicine, Humans, Pediatrics, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Telemedicine, Quality Improvement

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