Disparities in Offering Enrollment in Remote Patient Monitoring for COVID-19

Introduction: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) programs are increasingly common. There is a risk that inequitable use of RPM will perpetuate existing health care disparities. We conducted a study to determine if enrollment in a COVID-19 RPM program was offered differentially across demographic groups. Methods: From March through September 2020, patients with COVID-19 were evaluated within a large academic health system with a standardized care pathway that directed providers to refer the patients for RPM. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the effects of social vulnerability and urbanicity of residence on the odds of referral. We estimated vulnerability using the CDC social vulnerability index (SVI) and used logistic regression to determine odds ratios (ORs) for referral based on SVI and urbanicity. Results: Of 16,739 patients who had a qualifying health care encounter, 2,946 (17.6%) were referred for RPM. Patients in census tracts with higher social vulnerability were less likely to be referred than those in tracts with lower vulnerability (OR 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.63-0.84). Patients living in Micropolitan/Large Rural Cities or Small Towns/Small Rural Towns were more likely to be referred than those in Metropolitan/Urban areas. In the full regression model, including both SVI and urbanicity, urbanicity was the strongest predictor of referral, and patients living in Metropolitan/Urban areas were the most likely to be referred. Conclusions: We found disparities in who is offered access to remote monitoring despite the use of standardized care pathways. Health systems need to evaluate how they implement RPM programs and care pathways to ensure equitable care delivery.