How do consumers prefer their care delivered: In-person, telephone or videoconference?

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-17 DOI:10.1177/1357633X231160333
Centaine L Snoswell, Helen M Haydon, Jaimon T Kelly, Emma E Thomas, Liam J Caffery, Anthony C Smith
{"title":"How do consumers prefer their care delivered: In-person, telephone or videoconference?","authors":"Centaine L Snoswell, Helen M Haydon, Jaimon T Kelly, Emma E Thomas, Liam J Caffery, Anthony C Smith","doi":"10.1177/1357633X231160333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To gain a better understanding of consumer experiences with and preferences for telephone and videoconference consultations (telehealth), and how these compare to traditional in-person consultations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A national cross-sectional survey was administered to a representative sample of Australian adults who have received a telehealth service within the last year. Consumers were recruited by Qualtrics® through their online sampling service. The sample was representative of the broader Australian population according to gender, age, location (state/territory), and place of residence (urban or remote). Information on demographics (e.g., age, gender, employment status), recent telehealth experience, and preferences for consultation modality was collected. To measure preferences consumers were asked to indicate which modality they would prefer (in-person, telephone, or videoconference) for different scenarios. These included consultations of various time lengths, and for the top ten conditions for which individuals sought a general practitioner.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1069 consumers completed the survey. When consumers were asked to describe their most recent telehealth appointment, most were for follow-up appointments (67%) and completed by telephone (77%) rather than by videoconference, and with a general practitioner (75%). In-person consultations at a clinic were the top preference in all clinical scenarios presented, except when needing a prescription or to receive test results. In these cases, a telephone consultation was the preferred modality. Inexperience with videoconference and duration of consultation influenced preference for consultation mode. Consumers preferred to have short consultations of around five minutes done by telehealth (telephone or videoconference), while they preferred in-person for longer consultations (up to 60 minutes).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Many Australians have used telehealth in the past year to access healthcare, with telephone being the most common form of communication. Given the option and the experience to date, consumers prefer telephone when consultations related to either prescriptions or test results. Experience with videoconference for consultations increased consumer preferences for using it for future consultations.</p>","PeriodicalId":50024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X231160333","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To gain a better understanding of consumer experiences with and preferences for telephone and videoconference consultations (telehealth), and how these compare to traditional in-person consultations.

Methods: A national cross-sectional survey was administered to a representative sample of Australian adults who have received a telehealth service within the last year. Consumers were recruited by Qualtrics® through their online sampling service. The sample was representative of the broader Australian population according to gender, age, location (state/territory), and place of residence (urban or remote). Information on demographics (e.g., age, gender, employment status), recent telehealth experience, and preferences for consultation modality was collected. To measure preferences consumers were asked to indicate which modality they would prefer (in-person, telephone, or videoconference) for different scenarios. These included consultations of various time lengths, and for the top ten conditions for which individuals sought a general practitioner.

Results: A total of 1069 consumers completed the survey. When consumers were asked to describe their most recent telehealth appointment, most were for follow-up appointments (67%) and completed by telephone (77%) rather than by videoconference, and with a general practitioner (75%). In-person consultations at a clinic were the top preference in all clinical scenarios presented, except when needing a prescription or to receive test results. In these cases, a telephone consultation was the preferred modality. Inexperience with videoconference and duration of consultation influenced preference for consultation mode. Consumers preferred to have short consultations of around five minutes done by telehealth (telephone or videoconference), while they preferred in-person for longer consultations (up to 60 minutes).

Conclusions: Many Australians have used telehealth in the past year to access healthcare, with telephone being the most common form of communication. Given the option and the experience to date, consumers prefer telephone when consultations related to either prescriptions or test results. Experience with videoconference for consultations increased consumer preferences for using it for future consultations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
消费者希望如何获得医疗服务?面谈、电话还是视频会议?
目的:更好地了解消费者对电话和视频会议咨询(远程医疗)的体验和偏好,以及与传统面对面咨询的比较:方法:我们对去年接受过远程医疗服务的澳大利亚成年人进行了一次全国性横断面调查。消费者是由 Qualtrics® 通过其在线抽样服务招募的。根据性别、年龄、地点(州/地区)和居住地(城市或偏远地区)的不同,样本在更广泛的澳大利亚人口中具有代表性。收集的信息涉及人口统计学(如年龄、性别、就业状况)、最近的远程医疗经验以及对咨询方式的偏好。为了衡量消费者的偏好,我们要求他们指出在不同情况下更喜欢哪种方式(面谈、电话或视频会议)。这些情景包括不同时间长度的咨询,以及个人寻求全科医生治疗的十大病症:共有 1069 名消费者完成了调查。当消费者被要求描述他们最近的远程医疗预约时,大多数是为了复诊(67%),并且是通过电话(77%)而不是视频会议完成的,而且是与全科医生(75%)进行的。在所有临床场景中,除了需要处方或获得测试结果外,到诊所进行面谈都是首选。在这些情况下,电话咨询是首选方式。对视频会议缺乏经验和会诊时间长短影响了对会诊方式的偏好。消费者更喜欢通过远程医疗(电话或视频会议)进行 5 分钟左右的简短咨询,而对于时间较长的咨询(长达 60 分钟),他们则更喜欢面对面咨询:结论:在过去的一年中,许多澳大利亚人使用远程医疗来获得医疗保健服务,其中电话是最常见的沟通方式。根据消费者的选择和迄今为止的经验,当咨询与处方或检验结果有关时,他们更愿意选择电话。使用视频会议进行咨询的经验增加了消费者对今后使用视频会议进行咨询的偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
174
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare provides excellent peer reviewed coverage of developments in telemedicine and e-health and is now widely recognised as the leading journal in its field. Contributions from around the world provide a unique perspective on how different countries and health systems are using new technology in health care. Sections within the journal include technology updates, editorials, original articles, research tutorials, educational material, review articles and reports from various telemedicine organisations. A subscription to this journal will help you to stay up-to-date in this fast moving and growing area of medicine.
期刊最新文献
Satisfaction with videoconference-delivered CBT provided as part of a blended treatment approach for children and adolescents with mental disorders and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic: A follow-up survey among caregivers and therapists. Ear Portal: An urban-based ear, nose, and throat, and audiology referral telehealth portal to improve access to specialist ear health services for children. The Congenital Cardiology Cloud: Proof of feasibility of Germany's first tele-medical network for pediatric cardiology. Care trajectories for patients utilizing electronic visits for COVID-like symptoms in a large healthcare delivery system: May 2020-December 2021. Knowledge, perceptions, and readiness of telepharmacy (KPR-TP) questionnaire among pharmacists: Development and psychometric evaluation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1