Cost savings associated with electronic specialty consultations
Abstract
Objectives Electronic consultations, or e-consults, between primary care providers and specialists have been shown to improve access to specialty care, shorten wait times, and reduce outpatient visits. The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in health care costs between patients who received an electronic specialty consultation and patients who received a face-to-face specialty consultation. Study design Retrospective cohort evaluation of patients who received a specialty consultation in the Veterans Health Administration during 2016. Methods Patients who received an e-consult were matched 1:1 to patients who received a face-to-face consultation using propensity scores. Total, outpatient, and inpatient health care costs over 3 and 6 months following the specialty consultation were compared using a generalized linear model with a gamma distribution and log link. Results e-Consults accounted for 1.8% (urology) to 9.6% (hematology) of specialty consultations, on average. Across 11 specialties, patients receiving an e-consult had significantly lower health care costs compared with patients receiving a face-to-face consultation, ranging from 3.6% (cardiology) to 30.7% (hematology) lower. This was largely driven by differences in outpatient costs. Patients receiving an e-consult had significantly lower outpatient costs for all specialties except cardiology, ranging from 6.9% (endocrinology) to 31.2% (hematology) lower. Three-month inpatient costs among those who rec…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
eConsults can lead to decreased health care utilization and cost savings.
“eConsults can also lead to decreased health care utilization and cost savings.8,9”
From Large Language Model–Generated Electronic Consultations: A Blinded Comparative Study of OpenEvidence and Gastroenterologist Electronic Consultations (2026) · cites this paper as [8]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Stephenson, C. R., Varayil, J. E., Salonen, B. R., Wight, E. C., Sang, P. D., Ghosh, A. K., Shung, D. L., Croghan, I. T., Schroeder, D. R., & Hurt, R. T. (2026) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Digital Health · doi:10.1016/j.mcpdig.2026.100404
- Authors
- Whittington, M. D., Ho, P. M., Kirsh, S. R., Kenney, R. R., Todd-Stenberg, J., Au, D. H., & Simonetti, J.
- Affiliations
- Veterans Health Administration (US)
- ORCID
- David H. Au
- Venue
- The American Journal of Managed Care
- Published
- 2021-01-14
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e16-e23
- ISSN
- 1088-0224 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-2692
- OpenAlex
- W3123139229
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 3.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The American Journal of Managed Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
- Keywords
- e-consultation, health care costs, outpatient costs, hospital costs, face-to-face consultation, Veterans Health Administration, access to specialist care, healthcare resource utilization
- MeSH terms
- Electronics, Humans, Medicine, Retrospective Studies, Cost Savings, Remote Consultation
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