THE HIDDEN COST OF CONVENIENCE: ELASTIC UTILIZATION IN TELEMEDICINE
Author(s)
Yiwen Lu1, Yuqing Lei, MS2, David Asch, MD3, Yong Chen, PhD2;
1University of Pennsylvania, PhD student, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 3University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
1University of Pennsylvania, PhD student, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 3University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
OBJECTIVES: Telemedicine offers convenience and expanded access, but its impact on care trajectories and healthcare costs remains understudied. We aimed to quantify elastic utilization, defined as additional outpatient visits triggered by digital access that would not have otherwise occurred in a fully in-person care system, and assess its implications under current reimbursement models.
METHODS: Using Penn Medicine EHR data, we applied a digital twin-based framework to construct matched in-person counterparts for patients with an index telemedicine visit. Matching accounted for demographics, clinical characteristics, and visit context. We compared total follow-up outpatient visits at one quarter and one year post-index to estimate utilization differences attributable to digital access.
RESULTS: Telemedicine significantly increased follow-up visit volume. At one quarter, telemedicine patients had 2.41 visits on average, compared to 1.98 among matched in-person counterparts (difference 0.43). At one year, the totals were 6.53 versus 5.71 (difference 0.82). Each additional encounter incurred reimbursement under current pricing structures.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings challenge the prevailing assumption that telemedicine merely substitutes for in-person care. Instead, digital access drives a pattern of care expansion that may misalign with reimbursement strategies based on isolated encounters. These results highlight the need to reframe telemedicine reimbursement as part of longitudinal care planning, with implications for insurers, providers, and policy makers navigating the digital transformation of care.
METHODS: Using Penn Medicine EHR data, we applied a digital twin-based framework to construct matched in-person counterparts for patients with an index telemedicine visit. Matching accounted for demographics, clinical characteristics, and visit context. We compared total follow-up outpatient visits at one quarter and one year post-index to estimate utilization differences attributable to digital access.
RESULTS: Telemedicine significantly increased follow-up visit volume. At one quarter, telemedicine patients had 2.41 visits on average, compared to 1.98 among matched in-person counterparts (difference 0.43). At one year, the totals were 6.53 versus 5.71 (difference 0.82). Each additional encounter incurred reimbursement under current pricing structures.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings challenge the prevailing assumption that telemedicine merely substitutes for in-person care. Instead, digital access drives a pattern of care expansion that may misalign with reimbursement strategies based on isolated encounters. These results highlight the need to reframe telemedicine reimbursement as part of longitudinal care planning, with implications for insurers, providers, and policy makers navigating the digital transformation of care.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
EE421
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas