Introduction: This study examined the reimbursement opportunity and the time efficiency of a standard care model of unscheduled telephone consults compared to scheduled videoconference consults for obtaining pre-treatment medication histories for patients with cancer. Methods: Data related to (a) the available and the claimed activity-based funding for both models and (b) the number of contacts and the duration of each contact to complete the patient's medication history via either unscheduled telephone or scheduled videoconference consults were collected and compared. Results: Data was collected for 86 telephone and 56 videoconference consults. The actual activity-based funding claimed for telephone consults was $0, even though $86 of activity-based funding was available for each consult. This represented a $0 reimbursement for the staff time spent conducting the telephone consults, and a missed opportunity to claim $86 per consult. Activity-based funding was claimed for all but one videoconference consult with an average of $205 received per consult, when $221 per consult was available. Videoconference consults were an average of 2.3 min shorter than telephone consults. Discussion: When compared to unscheduled telephone consults, the scheduled videoconference consults represented increased reimbursement and equivalent time efficiency for the cancer pharmacist completing pre-treatment medication histories.
Keywords: Telehealth; cost-benefits; pharmacy; tele-oncology.