Dataset Information

Physicians' Perspectives of Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China: Qualitative Survey Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Generalized restriction of movement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, together with unprecedented pressure on the health system, has disrupted routine care for non-COVID-19 patients. Telemedicine should be vigorously promoted to reduce the risk of infections and to offer medical assistance to restricted patients.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to understand physicians' attitudes toward and perspectives of telemedicine during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, in order to provide support for better implementation of telemedicine.

Methods

We surveyed all physicians (N=148), from October 17 to 25, 2020, who attended the clinical informatics PhD program at West China Medical School, Sichuan University, China. The physicians came from 57 hospitals in 16 provinces (ie, municipalities) across China, 54 of which are 3A-level hospitals, two are 3B-level hospitals, and one is a 2A-level hospital.

Results

Among 148 physicians, a survey response rate of 87.2% (129/148) was attained. The average age of the respondents was 35.6 (SD 3.9) years (range 23-48 years) and 67 out of 129 respondents (51.9%) were female. The respondents come from 37 clinical specialties in 55 hospitals located in 14 provinces (ie, municipalities) across Eastern, Central, and Western China. A total of 94.6% (122/129) of respondents' hospitals had adopted a telemedicine system; however, 34.1% (44/129) of the physicians had never used a telemedicine system and only 9.3% (12/129) used one frequently (≥1 time/week). A total of 91.5% (118/129) and 88.4% (114/129) of physicians were willing to use telemedicine during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, respectively. Physicians considered the inability to examine patients in person to be the biggest concern (101/129, 78.3%) and the biggest barrier (76/129, 58.9%) to implementing telemedicine.

Conclusions

Telemedicine is not yet universally available for all health care needs and has not been used frequently by physicians in this study. However, the willingness of physicians to use telemedicine was high. Telemedicine still has many problems to overcome.

SUBMITTER: Liu J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8171288 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTelemedicine has been adopted in the inpatient setting to facilitate clinical interactions between on-site clinicians and isolated hospitalized patients. Such remote interactions have the potential to reduce pathogen exposure and use of personal protective equipment but may also pose new safety concerns given prior evidence that isolated patients can receive suboptimal care. Formal evaluations of the use and practical acceptance of inpatient telemedicine among hospitalized patients are lacking.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the experience of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with inpatient telemedicine introduced as an infection control measure during the pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative evaluation in a COVID-19 designated non-intensive care hospital unit at a large academic health center (Stanford Health Care) from October 2020 through January 2021. Semistructured qualitative interviews focused on patient experience, impact on quality of care, communication, and mental health. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants representing diversity across varying demographics until thematic saturation was reached. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using an inductive-deductive approach.ResultsInterviews with 20 hospitalized patients suggested that nonemergency clinical care and bridging to in-person care comprised the majority of inpatient telemedicine use. Nurses were reported to enter the room and call on the tablet far more frequently than physicians, who typically entered the room at least daily. Patients reported broad acceptance of the technology, citing improved convenience and reduced anxiety, but preferred in-person care where possible. Quality of care was believed to be similar to in-person care with the exception of a few patients who wanted more frequent in-person examinations. Ongoing challenges included low audio volume, shifting tablet location, and inconsistent verbal introductions from the clinical team.ConclusionsPatient experiences with inpatient telemedicine were largely favorable. Although most patients expressed a preference for in-person care, telemedicine was acceptable given the circumstances associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Improvements in technical and care team use may enhance acceptability. Further evaluation is needed to understand the impact of inpatient telemedicine and the optimal balance between in-person and virtual care in the hospital setting.

Project description:BackgroundTo mitigate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic, health care systems worldwide have implemented telemedicine technologies to respond to the growing need for health care services during these unprecedented times. In the United Arab Emirates, video and audio consultations have been implemented to deliver health services during the pandemic.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether differences exist in physicians' attitudes and perceptions of video and audio consultations when delivering telemedicine services during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsThis survey was conducted on a cohort of 880 physicians from outpatient facilities in Abu Dhabi, which delivered telemedicine services during the COVID-19 pandemic between November and December 2020. In total, 623 physicians responded (response rate=70.8%). The survey included a 5-point Likert scale to measure physician's attitudes and perceptions of video and audio consultations with reference to the quality of the clinical consultation and the professional productivity. Descriptive statistics were used to describe physicians' sociodemographic characteristics (age, sex, designation, clinical specialty, duration of practice, and previous experience with telemedicine) and telemedicine modality (video vs audio consultations). Regression models were used to assess the association between telemedicine modality and physicians' characteristics with the perceived outcomes of the web-based consultation.ResultsCompared to audio consultations, video consultations were significantly associated with physicians' confidence toward managing acute consultations (odds ratio [OR] 1.62, 95% CI 1.2-2.21; P=.002) and an increased ability to provide patient education during the web-based consultation (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.04-4.33; P=.04). There was no significant difference in physicians' confidence toward managing long-term and follow-up consultations through video or audio consultations (OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.88-2.08; P=.17). Video consultations were less likely to be associated with a reduced overall consultation time (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51-0.93; P=.02) and reduced time for patient note-taking compared to face-to-face visits (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.65; P<.001). Previous experience with telemedicine was significantly associated with a lower perceived risk of misdiagnosis (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.3-0.71; P<.001) and an enhanced physician-patient rapport (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.26-4.9; P=.008).ConclusionsThese results indicate that video consultations should be adopted frequently in the new remote clinical consultations. Previous experience with telemedicine was associated with a 2-fold confidence in treating acute conditions, less than a half of the perceived risk of misdiagnosis, and an increased ability to provide patients with health education and enhance the physician-patient rapport. Additionally, these results show that audio consultations are equivalent to video consultations in providing remote follow-up care to patients with chronic conditions. These findings may be beneficial to policymakers of e-health programs in low- and middle-income countries, where audio consultations may significantly increase access to geographically remote health services.

Project description:BackgroundPrior to the COVID-19 pandemic there were many barriers to telemedicine primary care for adults ≥65 years including insurance coverage restrictions and having lower digital access and literacy. With the pandemic, insurance coverage broadened and many older adults utilized telemedicine creating an opportunity to learn from their experiences to inform future policy.MethodsBetween April 2020 and June 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional multimethod study of English-speaking, cognitively-intact, adults ≥65, who had a phone-only and/or video telemedicine visit with their primary care physician within one large Massachusetts health system (10 different practices) since March 2020. The study questionnaire asked participants their overall satisfaction with telemedicine (7-point scale) and to compare telemedicine with in-person care. We used linear regression to examine the association between participants' demographics, Charlson comorbidity score, and survey completion date with their satisfaction score. The questionnaire also included open-ended questions on perceptions of telemedicine; which were analyzed using qualitative methods.ResultsOf 278 eligible patients reached, 208 completed the questionnaire; mean age was 74.4 years (±4.4), 61.5% were female, 91.4% were non-Hispanic White, 64.4% had ≥1 comorbidity, and 47.2% had a phone-only visit. Regardless of their age, participants reported being satisfied with telemedicine; median score was 6.0 on the 7-point scale (25th percentile = 5.0 and 75th percentile = 7.0). Non-Whites satisfaction scores were on average 1 point lower than those of non-Hispanic Whites (p = 0.02). Those with comorbidity reported scores that on average were 0.5 points lower than those without comorbidity (p = 0.07). Overall, 39.5% felt their telemedicine visit was worse than in-person care; 4.9% thought it was better. Participants appreciated telemedicine's convenience but described frustrating technical challenges. While participants preferred in-person care, most wanted telemedicine to remain available.ConclusionsAdults ≥65 reported being satisfied with primary care telemedicine during the pandemic's first 14 months and wanted telemedicine to remain available.

Project description:BackgroundIn the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, administrative barriers to the use of telemedicine have been reduced in Germany. The study focused on the analysis of use and assessment of telemedicine by physicians working in the outpatient sector, considering the perspective of different disciplines during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany.MethodsThe anonymous cross-sectional online survey within the study COVID-GAMS was conducted from 16 November 2020 to 1 January 2021. General practitioners; cardiologists; gastroenterologists; paediatricians; gynaecologists; ear, nose, and throat (ENT) specialists were randomly selected and invited to participate in the survey. At the same time, open recruitment to the online survey was conducted via the professional societies. Descriptive and regression analyses were performed based on the data of 1521 outpatient responding physicians.ResultsThe use of telephone and video consultation increased during the pandemic. Regarding the frequency of use, physicians already using telephone/video consultations in March/April 2020 report an increase in such services. General medicine was associated with an increased use of telephone and video consultations than cardiology, gynaecology or ENT, and in the case of telephone consultations also compared to paediatrics. General practitioners assessed the subjective usefulness higher than gynaecology and ENT. And the self-reported proportion of patients receiving telemedical care was higher correlated with general medicine than all other disciplines. The location of the practice (rural vs. urban), type of practice (individual vs. group) and gender (male vs. female) were also shown to be significant influencing factors on the variables mentioned above. Barriers reported by physicians not using telemedicine were the lack of equivalence to face-to-face contact and perceived low demand from patients.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic has led to a significant increase in the use of telemedicine, to varying degrees in the different specialities. Individual and structural factors lead to a reduced use of telemedicine and there are physician's and patient's barriers that have prevented telephone and video consultations from gaining acceptance by physicians. All these factors must be addressed if telemedicine procedures are to be implemented widely.

Project description:BackgroundIn an effort to contain the effects of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, health care systems worldwide implemented telemedical solutions to overcome staffing, technical, and infrastructural limitations. In Germany, a multitude of telemedical systems are already being used, while new approaches are rapidly being developed in response to the crisis. However, the extent of the current implementation within different health care settings, the user's acceptance and perception, as well as the hindering technical and regulatory obstacles remain unclear.ObjectiveThe aim of this paper is to assess the current status quo of the availability and routine use of telemedical solutions, user acceptance, and the subjectively perceived burdens on telemedical approaches. Furthermore, we seek to assess the perception of public information quality among professional groups and their preferred communication channels.MethodsA national online survey was conducted on 14 consecutive days in March and April 2020, and distributed to doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals in the German language.ResultsA total of 2827 medical professionals participated in the study. Doctors accounted for 65.6% (n=1855) of the professionals, 29.5% (n=833) were nursing staff, and 4.9% (n=139) were identified as others such as therapeutic staff. A majority of participants rated the significance of telemedicine within the crisis as high (1065/2730, 39%) or neutral (n=720, 26.4%); however, there were significant differences between doctors and nurses (P=.01) as well as between the stationary sector compared to the ambulatory sector (P<.001). Telemedicine was already in routine use for 19.6% (532/2711) of German health care providers and in partial use for 40.2% (n=1090). Participants working in private practices (239/594, 40.2%) or private clinics (23/59, 39.0%) experienced less regulatory or technical obstacles compared to university hospitals (586/1190, 49.2%). A majority of doctors rated the public information quality on COVID-19 as good (942/1855, 50.8%) or very good (213/1855, 11.5%); nurses rated the quality of public information significantly lower (P<.001). Participant's age negatively correlated with the perception of telemedicine's significance (ρ=-0.23; P<.001).ConclusionsTelemedicine has a broad acceptance among German medical professionals. However, to establish telemedical structures within routine care, technical and regulatory burdens must be overcome.

Project description:BackgroundOver recent years the lack of patient involvement in the design, set-up and implementation of clinical research studies has been well recognised; as such there has been a drive within research communities to increase patient participation. Patient perspectives on telemedicine differ widely, with variation in whether patients feel remote consultations are beneficial. By means of a patient-driven survey, we aimed to formally evaluate patient perspectives on its benefits and pitfalls, focusing on patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).MethodsAn e-survey was developed by two patient representatives on the BritPACT steering committee, with a view to determining unmet needs and the perceived impact on clinical care of virtual consultations amongst patients with PsA.Results128 patients responded to the e-survey. 109 patients rated the effectiveness of their telemedicine appointment and, of these, 18% felt their virtual consultation was very/extremely effective compared to an in-clinic consultation and 49% felt it was somewhat/equally as effective; furthermore, 48% (51/107) felt that such virtual consultations would be of benefit to them after the pandemic. 36% of respondents felt their virtual consultation was not as effective as an in-clinic review. Themes identified from open-ended questions included the lack of visual cues, lack of physical examination and effect on rapport and ease of open communication as the main pitfalls of virtual consultations. Patients with well-controlled symptoms appeared more satisfied with remote reviews compared to those with active disease, though on the whole respondents recognised the benefits, such as saving travel time and costs. Those who had an established relationship with their health professional appeared less concerned regarding virtual consultations though a recurring view was that newly diagnosed patients should have in-clinic appointments to build rapport and improve symptom control at an early stage.ConclusionsOverall patients' perspectives on virtual consultations varied widely though patients with well-controlled symptoms and those who had a previously established relationship with their healthcare professionals and well-controlled disease appeared more satisfied with remote reviews.