Curtis et al.: Disparities in Access to Telemedicine

In Disparities in digital access among American rural and urban households and implications for telemedicine-based services, authors Megan E. Curtis, Sarah E. Clingan, Yih-Ing Hser, Yuhui Zhu, and Larissa J. Mooney (all of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, UCLA), as well as Huiying Guo (Health Policy and Management, UCLA), discuss rural disparities in digital access and the impact such access has on telemedicine services.

Digital access is a critical and necessary component of access to telemedicine-based services. This article asserts that it is important to understand how disparities in digital access between those who live in urban areas compared to rural ones impact access to telemedicine. Since telemedicine access requires both an Internet-enabled device and access to high-speed internet, populations and households without adequate digital access do not have the same access to telemedicine.

The authors rely on the 2019 American Community Survey, which provides data on geographic area, socioeconomic status, race, and digital access. Prior research had yet to examine digital access at the household level. Specifically, the authors divide households into those located in rural areas, and those located within a metropolitan area. The article compares the disparity in digital access between these two categories of households within the larger framework of other socioeconomic factors.

By simultaneously analyzing disparities in household digital access with racial and economic factors, the authors attempt to identify the groups most vulnerable to issues with limited access to telemedicine, such as rural, uninsured households. The authors argue that rural households benefit most from access to telemedicine, and therefore digital access directly impacts how those in rural areas access healthcare.

The authors present their data throughout the article in tables, which cross-reference different social and economic categories, rural and metropolitan areas, and digital access. These tables provide a wide variety of data and are worth examining. For example, the article details how 23% of non-metro households were without any digital access, compared to just 13% of metro households. Overall, the authors show how digital access varies across different social factors and view such digital access through the lens of access to telemedicine. The data analysis demonstrates how these differences may impact the ability of different populations to access healthcare.