635 - Satisfaction and Efficacy of Pediatric Obesity Prevention Program, Healthy You for Life, Telehealth versus In-Person Visits

Poster Number: 635
Publication Number: 635.455

Tracy Dien, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, United States; Tristan Hunter. Kuhn, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Chesapeake, VA, United States; Peter J. Cunniff, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Saint Paul, MN, United States; Amil Ahsan, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA, United States; John W. Harrington, Children's Hospital of The King's Daughters, Norfolk, VA, United States

Background: Childhood obesity in the United States was exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A meta-analysis in 2021 demonstrated an increase in body weight (MD 2.67 kg) and BMI (MD 0.77 kg/m2) amongst school-age children during this time. Many obesity prevention programs moved to virtual platforms; however, there has been no significant data to demonstrate noninferiority in the clinical efficacy of telehealthcare in these settings.

Objective: This project aimed to evaluate the Healthy You for Life (HYFL) program, a pediatric obesity prevention program in Virginia, by comparing the efficacy of their telehealth visits during the COVID-19 pandemic to their in-person visits.

Design/Methods: There were two parts to this study. First, a satisfaction survey was conducted over the phone to the parents of patients of HYFL. In addition, a retrospective chart review was conducted to compare the BMI values of HYFL patients at the start of the program to their BMI's 6-12 months afterward as a measure of efficacy. Three cohorts were compared in this study: (1) patients who had only in-person visits, (2) patients who had only telehealth visits, and (3) patients who had a combination of telehealth and in-person visits.

Results: Based on survey data of 107 participants, there was no significant difference in the survey outcomes amongst those who had only in-person or only telehealth visits. Those who had a combination of visit types reported better overall experiences during their in-person visit, but there was not any significant difference in following provided recommendations after the visit (p=0.29). Moreover, they agreed that the level of care provided during the telehealth visit was equal to the quality that was provided in person (M= 0.98, 95% CI [0.75, 1.22), p< 0.001). Out of the 107 survey participants, 88 met criteria for evaluating BMI changes. There appeared to be no significant statistical difference amongst the three cohorts.

Conclusion(s):

Results indicate similar efficacy between in-person versus telehealth visits. Therefore, obesity prevention programs could consider promoting telehealth visits to help combat their primary obstacle of high drop-out rates due to transportation and timing conflicts. Future studies could examine what specific aspects of appointments made patients more or less likely to attend and/or comply with provider instructions.