Here are three things to know about the research.
1. A research team from the Iowa City-based University of Iowa and Sioux Falls, S.D.-based Avera Health evaluated tele-emergency financing from the critical access hospital perspective. They defined 10 categories of financial analysis which were populated with data from Avera Health’s eEmergency program, including telephone interviews, site visits and financial data. This information was augmented with national data where it was available.
2. They then analyzed profit and loss financial scenarios for the CAHs. They found there was an average profit of $187,614 for high-revenue, low-expense scenarios. Midrange scenarios yielded $49,841 in profits and low-revenue, high-expense scenarios netted losses of $69,588.
3. “Tele-emergency may be a profitable rural hospital service line if the participating hospital adjusts [emergency department] processes to take advantage of increased revenue/savings opportunities afforded by tele-emergency,” the authors concluded. “Savings due to tele-emergency primarily accrue when physician ED backup and physician ED staffing costs are substituted.”
More articles on health IT:
10 startups to know for 2016
The upside of EHRs: 3 physicians’ perspectives on what they get right
Telemedicine in 2016: Consumerized and more highly utilized
