학술논문

Travel Cost Savings and Practicality for Low-Vision Telerehabilitation.
Document Type
Article
Source
Telemedicine & e-Health. Jul2019, Vol. 25 Issue 7, p649-654. 6p.
Subject
*LOW vision
*TRAVEL costs
*TIME travel
*VETERANS
*SAVINGS
*FISCAL year
*TELEREHABILITATION
Language
ISSN
1530-5627
Abstract
Introduction:Veterans with low vision who live in rural communities have limited access to low-vision rehabilitation services, unless they are able to travel several miles to a specialty low-vision clinic. A low-vision optometry telerehabilitation evaluation is a thorough assessment of patient's functional vision. Following each low-vision optometry telerehabilitation evaluation is a low-vision telerehabilitation initial assessment with a blind rehabilitation therapist. Our objective was to estimate the acceptance and practicality of low-vision telerehabilitation and investigate the travel cost and time savings. Methods:Utilizing Google Maps™, round-trip travel mileage and travel time can be estimated between the veteran's home and the Buffalo Veterans Affairs (VA) and compared with the round-trip mileage and travel time between the veteran's home and local community-based outpatient center (CBOC) or local VA for low-vision telerehabilitation services. The difference is the savings in travel miles and time. Cost saving can be calculated by multiplying difference in travel miles by cost per mile. Results:Veterans who chose not to schedule face-to-face low-vision rehabilitation at the Buffalo VA due to an average round-trip travel distance of 151 miles scheduled a low-vision telerehabilitation at a local CBOC or local VA with an average round-trip travel distance of 29 miles. Adding low-vision telerehabilitation services from fiscal year (FY) 13 to FY 17 resulted in a 24% increase in low-vision patient care. The median saving of travel miles for rural veterans was 122 miles per veteran, and the median saving of travel time was 2.09 h per veteran. Overall, the median saving of the travel cost was $65.29 per veteran. Conclusions:This study shows and supports low-vision telerehabilitation as an accepted, practical, time-saving, and cost-saving alternative option to traditional face-to-face consultations with a low-vision optometrist and blind rehabilitation therapist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]