Telemedicine: Bridging the Gap Between Rural and Urban Oncologic Healthcare in Kenya

Background: The AMPATH Consortium has served to greatly expand healthcare in western Kenya. Gaps and limitations in care still exist, especially in oncology care in rural areas. Telemedicine provides a lower cost, practical method to maximize physician resources and limit cost and stress to families with socioeconomic limitations in rural Kenya. The following paper seeks to discuss the importance of developing a telemedicine model in western Kenya and the many advantages telemedicine can bring, as well as discuss the telemedicine model being developed by AMPATH Oncology. Aim: Integrate paper-based medical records into the AMPATH AIDS EMR; Identify sustainable telemedicine tools to integrate into the EMR; Establish networking in rural clinics; Budget in IT personnel at each clinic to assist in patient setup with central site; use solar as primary power source for devices to aid in power issues. Only 45% of Kenyans have access to power; Use cellular networks for communication; Maximize time allocated for physicians to see patients; Decrease travel time to clinics as only 32% of Kenyans live in urban environments. Methods: Cost analysis of remote clinic locations and associated costs; Clinic budget estimate for networking and telemedicine support position; Cost summary and savings Results: Estimated costs for the operations budget for the 17 rural outreach clinics include the costs of hardware, solar networking setup, and internet at a total $3400/wk. This will decrease after the first year to $1700 for maintenance costs of equipment. Personnel consists of 1 local person to support the system and will be a weekly cost of $1870. Lost time for physicians due to road travel totals ∼100 hours weekly. Estimated salaries for an oncologist at $30/h leads to a cost of $3007/wk in lost productivity. It should be noted that lodging and per diem expenses are not included in the estimated expenses that total $6114/wk. By doing telemedicine at the rural clinics in an ideal 48 workable week situation. The savings of $528,000 is a clear evidence that this is financially feasible solely based on travel savings over 5 years. For this reason, the actual savings is ∼$264,000 and still makes a strong argument for this being the right move. Conclusion: Telemedicine is a viable and necessary resource for developing oncologic care in rural Kenya. We believe that telemedicine represents a natural evolution in healthcare in Kenya to support its rural population. Telemedicine helps maximize the limited physician resources and allows them to reach a larger audience without tying up their time in lengthy commutes. Last, telemedicine should assist patients to overcome the barriers of cost and time that limit their treatment. Future challenges and gains will be made with the evolution of the newly formed national health insurance system. Gaining support and reimbursement from telemedicine visits will be crucial to ensuring the success of telemedicine.