Dataset Information

Revisiting Effective Communication Between Patients and Physicians: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Comparing Text-Based Electronic Versus Face-to-Face Communication.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Research has shown that text-based communication via telemedicine will continue to be a mode of communication that patients and physicians use in the future. However, very few studies have examined patients' perspectives regarding the increased use of text-based communication versus face-to-face (FtF) communication. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to understand and compare the potential differences in patients' perceptions of communication effectiveness with their physicians through different modes of communication. METHODS:We conducted a web-based survey of 345 patients to explore the impact of different channels on effective communication and perceived health behavior and outcomes. We tested the impact of patients' perceived communication and media effectiveness on their self-efficacy, communication satisfaction, and perceived health outcomes, separately for text-based information technology (IT)-mediated communication and FtF communication. Furthermore, we conducted a group comparison to identify significant differences across these 2 groups. RESULTS:We found no significant differences between patients' perceptions of effective communication using either IT-mediated communication or FtF communication with their physicians. However, we found significant differences in patients' perception of media effectiveness: patients perceived FtF communication to be a more favorable medium (P=.02). Interestingly, we found no significant difference in terms of benefits (P=.09) and success (P=.08) of IT-mediated communication versus FtF communication. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study imply that patients can achieve the same level of communication effectiveness with their physicians using IT-mediated communication as they would in comparable FtF interactions, but patients view FtF communication to be a more favorable medium than IT-mediated communication.

SUBMITTER: Mirzaei T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7254277 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Revisiting Effective Communication Between Patients and Physicians: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Comparing Text-Based Electronic Versus Face-to-Face Communication.

Mirzaei Tala T Kashian Nicole N

Journal of medical Internet research 20200513 5

<h4>Background</h4>Research has shown that text-based communication via telemedicine will continue to be a mode of communication that patients and physicians use in the future. However, very few studies have examined patients' perspectives regarding the increased use of text-based communication versus face-to-face (FtF) communication.<h4>Objective</h4>This study aimed to understand and compare the potential differences in patients' perceptions of communication effectiveness with their physicians ...[more]

PMID: 32401213

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceTimely tests are warranted to assess the association between generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) use and physicians' work efforts.ObjectiveTo investigate the association between GenAI-drafted replies for patient messages and physician time spent on answering messages and the length of replies.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized waiting list quality improvement (QI) study from June to August 2023 in an academic health system. Primary care physicians were randomized to an immediate activation group and a delayed activation group. Data were analyzed from August to November 2023.ExposureAccess to GenAI-drafted replies for patient messages.Main outcomes and measuresTime spent (1) reading messages, (2) replying to messages, (3) length of replies, and (4) physician likelihood to recommend GenAI drafts. The a priori hypothesis was that GenAI drafts would be associated with less physician time spent reading and replying to messages. A mixed-effects model was used.ResultsFifty-two physicians participated in this QI study, with 25 randomized to the immediate activation group and 27 randomized to the delayed activation group. A contemporary control group included 70 physicians. There were 18 female participants (72.0%) in the immediate group and 17 female participants (63.0%) in the delayed group; the median age range was 35-44 years in the immediate group and 45-54 years in the delayed group. The median (IQR) time spent reading messages in the immediate group was 26 (11-69) seconds at baseline, 31 (15-70) seconds 3 weeks after entry to the intervention, and 31 (14-70) seconds 6 weeks after entry. The delayed group's median (IQR) read time was 25 (10-67) seconds at baseline, 29 (11-77) seconds during the 3-week waiting period, and 32 (15-72) seconds 3 weeks after entry to the intervention. The contemporary control group's median (IQR) read times were 21 (9-54), 22 (9-63), and 23 (9-60) seconds in corresponding periods. The estimated association of GenAI was a 21.8% increase in read time (95% CI, 5.2% to 41.0%; P = .008), a -5.9% change in reply time (95% CI, -16.6% to 6.2%; P = .33), and a 17.9% increase in reply length (95% CI, 10.1% to 26.2%; P < .001). Participants recognized GenAI's value and suggested areas for improvement.Conclusions and relevanceIn this QI study, GenAI-drafted replies were associated with significantly increased read time, no change in reply time, significantly increased reply length, and some perceived benefits. Rigorous empirical tests are necessary to further examine GenAI's performance. Future studies should examine patient experience and compare multiple GenAIs, including those with medical training.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Ensuring treatment adherence is important for the internal validity of clinical trials. In intervention studies where touch points decrease over time, there is even more of an adherence challenge. Trials with multiple cohorts offer an opportunity to innovate on ways to increase treatment adherence without compromising the integrity of the study design, and previous cohorts can serve as historical controls. Electronically delivered nudges offer low-cost opportunities to increase treatment adherence. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of electronic messages (e-messages) on treatment adherence to the last cohort of a parent weight loss intervention during the second half of a year-long trial, when intervention checkpoint frequency decreases. Treatment adherence is measured by intervention class attendance and adherence to the intervention diet. METHODS:All participants in the last cohort (cohort 5, n=128) of a large randomized weight loss study were offered an e-message intervention to improve participant adherence during the last 6 months of a 1-year weight loss program. Overall, 3 to 4 electronic weekly messages asked participants about intervention diet adherence. A propensity score model was estimated using 97 participants who opted to receive e-messages and 31 who declined in cohort 5 and used to pair match cohort 5 e-message participants to a historical control group from cohorts 1 to 4. Moreover, 88 participants had complete data, yielding 176 participants in the final analyses. After matching, intervention and matched control groups were compared on (1) proportion of class attendance between the 6 and 12 month study endpoints, (2) diet adherence, as measured by total carbohydrate grams for low-carbohydrate (LC) and total fat grams for low-fat (LF) diets at 12 months, and (3) weight change from 6 to 12 months. The dose-response relationship between the proportion of text messages responded to and the 3 outcomes was also investigated. RESULTS:Compared with matched controls, receiving e-messages had no effect on (1) treatment adherence; class attendance after 6 months +4.6% (95% CI -4.43 to 13.68, P=.31), (2) adherence; LC -2.5 g carbohydrate, 95% CI -29.9 to 24.8, P=.85; LF +6.2 g fat, 95% CI -4.1 to 17.0, P=.26); or on (3) the secondary outcome of weight change in the last 6 months; +0.3 kg (95% CI -1.0 to 1.5, P=.68). There was a positive significant response correlation between the percentage of messages to which participants responded and class attendance (r=.45, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS:Although this e-message intervention did not improve treatment adherence, future studies can learn from this pilot and may incorporate more variety in the prompts and more interaction to promote more effective user engagement. Uniquely, this study demonstrated the potential for innovating within a multicohort trial using propensity score-matched historical control subjects. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01826591; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01826591. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):RR2-10.1016/j.cct.2016.12.021.

Project description:With the public's increased use of the Internet, the use of email as a means of communication between patients and physicians will likely increase. Yet, despite evidence of increased interest by patients, e-mail use by physicians for clinical care has been slow.To examine the factors associated with physician-patient e-mail, and report on the physicians' adherence to recognized guidelines for e-mail communication.Cross-sectional survey (March-May, 2005) of all primary care physicians (n = 10253), and a 25% stratified, random sample of all ambulatory clinical specialists (n = 3954) in the state of Florida. Physicians were surveyed on email use with patients, adherence to recognized guidelines, and demographics.The 4203 physicians completed the questionnaire (a 28.2% participation rate). Of these, 689 (16.6%) had personally used e-mail to communicate with patients. Only 120 (2.9%) used e-mail with patients frequently. In univariate analysis, e-mail use correlated with physician age (decreased use: age > 61; P = .014), race (decreased use: Asian background; P < .001), medical training (increased use: family medicine, P = .001; or surgical specialty, P = .007; but not internal medicine, P = .112), practice size (> 50 physicians, P < .001), and geographic location (urban 17.2% vs. rural, 7.9%; P < .001). Multivariate modeling showed that only practice size greater than 50 (OR = 1.94; 95% CI = 1.01-3.79) and Asian-American race (OR = 0.26; 95% CI = 0.14-0.49) were related to e-mail use with patients. Remarkably, only 46 physicians (6.7%) adhered to at least half of the 13 selected guidelines for e-mail communication.This large survey of physicians, practicing in ambulatory settings, shows only modest advances in the adoption of e-mail communication, and little adherence to recognized guidelines for e-mail correspondence. Further efforts are required to educate both patients and physicians on the advantages and limitations of e-mail communication, and to remove fiscal and legal barriers to its adoption.

Project description:BackgroundEvaluation is a challenging but necessary part of the development cycle of clinical information systems like the electronic medical records (EMR) system. It is believed that such evaluations should include multiple perspectives, be comparative and employ both qualitative and quantitative methods. Self-administered questionnaires are frequently used as a quantitative evaluation method in medical informatics, but very few validated questionnaires address clinical use of EMR systems.MethodsWe have developed a task-oriented questionnaire for evaluating EMR systems from the clinician's perspective. The key feature of the questionnaire is a list of 24 general clinical tasks. It is applicable to physicians of most specialties and covers essential parts of their information-oriented work. The task list appears in two separate sections, about EMR use and task performance using the EMR, respectively. By combining these sections, the evaluator may estimate the potential impact of the EMR system on health care delivery. The results may also be compared across time, site or vendor. This paper describes the development, performance and validation of the questionnaire. Its performance is shown in two demonstration studies (n = 219 and 80). Its content is validated in an interview study (n = 10), and its reliability is investigated in a test-retest study (n = 37) and a scaling study (n = 31).ResultsIn the interviews, the physicians found the general clinical tasks in the questionnaire relevant and comprehensible. The tasks were interpreted concordant to their definitions. However, the physicians found questions about tasks not explicitly or only partially supported by the EMR systems difficult to answer. The two demonstration studies provided unambiguous results and low percentages of missing responses. In addition, criterion validity was demonstrated for a majority of task-oriented questions. Their test-retest reliability was generally high, and the non-standard scale was found symmetric and ordinal.ConclusionThis questionnaire is relevant for clinical work and EMR systems, provides reliable and interpretable results, and may be used as part of any evaluation effort involving the clinician's perspective of an EMR system.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the emergence of Web-based patient-provider contact, it is still unclear how the quality of Web-based doctor-patient interactions differs from face-to-face interactions.ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine (1) the impact of a consultation medium on doctors' and patients' communicative behavior in terms of information exchange, interpersonal relationship building, and shared decision making and (2) the mediating role of doctors' and patients' communicative behavior on satisfaction with both types of consultation medium.MethodsDoctor-patient consultations on pelvic organ prolapse were simulated, both in a face-to-face and in a screen-to-screen (video) setting. Twelve medical interns and 6 simulated patients prepared 4 different written scenarios and were randomized to perform a total of 48 consultations. Effects of the consultations were measured by questionnaires that participants filled out directly after the consultation.ResultsWith respect to patient-related outcomes, satisfaction, perceived information exchange, interpersonal relationship building, and perceived shared decision making showed no significant differences between face-to-face and screen-to-screen consultations. Patients' attitude toward Web-based communication (b=-.249, P=.02 and patients' perceived time and attention (b=.271, P=.03) significantly predicted patients' perceived interpersonal relationship building. Patients' perceived shared decision making was positively related to their satisfaction with the consultation (b=.254, P=.005). Overall, patients experienced significantly greater shared decision making with a female doctor (mean 4.21, SD 0.49) than with a male doctor (mean 3.66 [SD 0.73]; b=.401, P=.009). Doctor-related outcomes showed no significant differences in satisfaction, perceived information exchange, interpersonal relationship building, and perceived shared decision making between the conditions. There was a positive relationship between perceived information exchange and doctors' satisfaction with the consultation (b=.533, P<.001). Furthermore, doctors' perceived interpersonal relationship building was positively related to doctors' satisfaction with the consultation (b=.331, P=.003).ConclusionsIn this study, the quality of doctor-patient communication, as indicated by information exchange, interpersonal relationship building, and shared decision making, did not differ significantly between Web-based and face-to-face consultations. Doctors and simulated patients were equally satisfied with both types of consultation medium, and no differences were found in the manner in which participants perceived communicative behavior during these consultations. The findings suggest that worries about a negative impact of Web-based video consultation on the quality of patient-provider consultations seem unwarranted as they offer the same interaction quality and satisfaction level as regular face-to-face consultations.

Dataset Information

Revisiting Effective Communication Between Patients and Physicians: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Comparing Text-Based Electronic Versus Face-to-Face Communication.

Publications

Revisiting Effective Communication Between Patients and Physicians: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Comparing Text-Based Electronic Versus Face-to-Face Communication.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets