Cargando…
A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type?
OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that patients consider when choosing between future in-person, video, or telephone visits. BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has been rapidly integrated into ambulatory neurology in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Ambulatory neurology patients at a single center wer...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9068349/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35508812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00415-022-11149-0 |
_version_ | 1784700207777185792 |
---|---|
author | Olszewski, Carly Thomson, Sharon Pring, Kelly Cox, Siobhan Merrill, Rebecca Fishman, Emily Ambrosini, Alexander Soltany, Kevin Alexander Bognet, Gabby Strauss, Lauren Graham, Rachel Guzik, Amy Strowd, Roy E. |
author_facet | Olszewski, Carly Thomson, Sharon Pring, Kelly Cox, Siobhan Merrill, Rebecca Fishman, Emily Ambrosini, Alexander Soltany, Kevin Alexander Bognet, Gabby Strauss, Lauren Graham, Rachel Guzik, Amy Strowd, Roy E. |
author_sort | Olszewski, Carly |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that patients consider when choosing between future in-person, video, or telephone visits. BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has been rapidly integrated into ambulatory neurology in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Ambulatory neurology patients at a single center were contacted via telephone to complete: (1) a survey quantifying likelihood of scheduling a future telemedicine visit, and (2) a semi-structured qualitative interview following their visit in March 2021. Data were processed using the principles of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Of 2493 visits, 39% assented to post-visit feedback; 74% were in-person visits and 13% video and telephone. Patients with in-person visits were less likely than those with video and telephone visits to “definitely” consider a future telemedicine visit (36 vs. 59 and 62%, respectively; p < 0.001). Patients considered five key factors when scheduling future visits: “Pros of Visit Type,” “Barriers to Telemedicine,” “Situational Context,” “Inherent Beliefs,” and “Extrinsic Variables.” Patients with telemedicine visits considered convenience as a pro, while those with in-person visits cited improved quality of care. Accessibility and user familiarity were considered barriers to telemedicine by patients with in-person and telephone visits, whereas system limitations were prevalent among patients with video visits. Patients agreed that stable conditions can be monitored via telemedicine, whereas physical examination warrants an in-person visit. Telemedicine was inherently considered equivalent to in-person care by patients with telephone visits. Awareness of telemedicine must be improved for patients with in-person visits. CONCLUSION: Across visit types, patients agree that telemedicine is convenient and effective in many circumstances. Future care delivery models should incorporate the patient perspective to implement hybrid models where telemedicine is an adjunct to in-person visits in ambulatory neurology. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00415-022-11149-0. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9068349 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90683492022-05-05 A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? Olszewski, Carly Thomson, Sharon Pring, Kelly Cox, Siobhan Merrill, Rebecca Fishman, Emily Ambrosini, Alexander Soltany, Kevin Alexander Bognet, Gabby Strauss, Lauren Graham, Rachel Guzik, Amy Strowd, Roy E. J Neurol Original Communication OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that patients consider when choosing between future in-person, video, or telephone visits. BACKGROUND: Telemedicine has been rapidly integrated into ambulatory neurology in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Ambulatory neurology patients at a single center were contacted via telephone to complete: (1) a survey quantifying likelihood of scheduling a future telemedicine visit, and (2) a semi-structured qualitative interview following their visit in March 2021. Data were processed using the principles of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Of 2493 visits, 39% assented to post-visit feedback; 74% were in-person visits and 13% video and telephone. Patients with in-person visits were less likely than those with video and telephone visits to “definitely” consider a future telemedicine visit (36 vs. 59 and 62%, respectively; p < 0.001). Patients considered five key factors when scheduling future visits: “Pros of Visit Type,” “Barriers to Telemedicine,” “Situational Context,” “Inherent Beliefs,” and “Extrinsic Variables.” Patients with telemedicine visits considered convenience as a pro, while those with in-person visits cited improved quality of care. Accessibility and user familiarity were considered barriers to telemedicine by patients with in-person and telephone visits, whereas system limitations were prevalent among patients with video visits. Patients agreed that stable conditions can be monitored via telemedicine, whereas physical examination warrants an in-person visit. Telemedicine was inherently considered equivalent to in-person care by patients with telephone visits. Awareness of telemedicine must be improved for patients with in-person visits. CONCLUSION: Across visit types, patients agree that telemedicine is convenient and effective in many circumstances. Future care delivery models should incorporate the patient perspective to implement hybrid models where telemedicine is an adjunct to in-person visits in ambulatory neurology. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00415-022-11149-0. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-05-05 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9068349/ /pubmed/35508812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00415-022-11149-0 Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2022 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. |
spellingShingle | Original Communication Olszewski, Carly Thomson, Sharon Pring, Kelly Cox, Siobhan Merrill, Rebecca Fishman, Emily Ambrosini, Alexander Soltany, Kevin Alexander Bognet, Gabby Strauss, Lauren Graham, Rachel Guzik, Amy Strowd, Roy E. A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? |
title | A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? |
title_full | A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? |
title_fullStr | A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? |
title_short | A comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? |
title_sort | comparison of telemedicine and in-person neurology visits: what are the factors that patients consider when selecting future visit type? |
topic | Original Communication |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9068349/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35508812 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00415-022-11149-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT olszewskicarly acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT thomsonsharon acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT pringkelly acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT coxsiobhan acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT merrillrebecca acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT fishmanemily acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT ambrosinialexander acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT soltanykevinalexander acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT bognetgabby acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT strausslauren acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT grahamrachel acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT guzikamy acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT strowdroye acomparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT olszewskicarly comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT thomsonsharon comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT pringkelly comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT coxsiobhan comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT merrillrebecca comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT fishmanemily comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT ambrosinialexander comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT soltanykevinalexander comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT bognetgabby comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT strausslauren comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT grahamrachel comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT guzikamy comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype AT strowdroye comparisonoftelemedicineandinpersonneurologyvisitswhatarethefactorsthatpatientsconsiderwhenselectingfuturevisittype |