OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus pandemic created significant, abrupt challenges to the delivery of ambulatory health care. Because tertiary medical centers limited elective in-person services, telehealth was rapidly enacted in settings with minimal previous experience to allow continued access to care. With this quality improvement (QI) initiative, we aimed to achieve a virtual visit volume of at least 75% of our prepandemic volume. We also describe patient and provider experience with telehealth services. METHODS: Our QI team identified the primary drivers contributing to low telehealth volume and developed a telehealth scheduling protocol and data tracking system using QI-based strategies. Patients and providers were surveyed on their telehealth experience. RESULTS: At the onset of the pandemic, weekly visit volume dropped by 65% (99 weekly visits; historical average of 281). Over the subsequent 3 weeks, using rapid Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles, we achieved our goal volume. In surveys, it was indicated that most participants had never before used telehealth (71% of patients; 82% of providers) yet reported high satisfaction (90% of patients; 81% of providers). Both groups expressed concern over the lack of in-person assessments. Most respondents were interested in future use of telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: With a QI-based approach, we successfully maintained access to care via telehealth services for pediatric pulmonary patients during the coronavirus pandemic and found high rates of satisfaction among patients and providers. Telehealth will likely continue to be a part of our health care delivery platform, expanding the reach of our services. Further work is needed to understand the effects on clinical outcomes.

Introduction: Pediatric asthma affects 5.5 million US children and is the leading cause of pediatric chronic illness globally. Those with severe asthma have significantly higher healthcare costs compared to those with non-severe disease. Biologics are the newest class of anti-asthma therapy approved for use in patients with severe asthma > 6 years with the eosinophilic phenotype. Objective: The goals of this study were to (1) describe the baseline characteristics of new US pediatric mepolizumab users between 2015 and end dates that varied by data partner (6/30/19–5/31/21), (2) describe asthma medication use in the 12 months preceding and following mepolizumab initiation in this group and (3) assess adherence and persistence to mepolizumab in the 12 months following initiation. Methods: Through an observational cohort study using insurance claim databases, we studied children with a diagnosis of asthma in the preceding 12 months who started mepolizumab and had 12 months of follow-up data. Results: Baseline characteristics of the 72 children who initiated mepolizumab showed variable comorbidities, the most common being allergic rhinitis (88%) and recurrent respiratory infections (71%), as well as varied medication dispensings and patterns of healthcare utilization prior to initiating mepolizumab. Half met the criteria for severe asthma per the GINA guidelines. Comparing weighted averages of treatments dispensed in the 12 months prior to versus following mepolizumab initiation, we observed no significant change in asthma treatments dispensed. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that pediatric patients prescribed mepolizumab have variable previous treatment history and severity of disease, and we found no evidence that mepolizumab alters other asthma medications dispensed in the first 12 months following initiation.