4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
3 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Demographics and Social Factors Associated With Persistent Nonuse of Video Appointments at a Multisite Health Care Institution: Cross-Sectional Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          During the COVID-19 outbreak, video appointments became a popular method for health care delivery, particularly in the early stages of the pandemic. Although Mayo Clinic aimed to reduce face-to-face (F2F) appointments to prevent the spread of the virus, some patients continued seeing their health care providers in person. In the later stages of the pandemic, many patients became comfortable with video appointments, even if they were initially hesitant. However, a subset of patients continued to avoid video appointments. It is not yet clear what sociodemographic factors may be associated with this group of patients.

          Objective

          This cross-sectional study aimed to examine demographic and social determinant of health (SDoH) factors associated with persistent nonusers of video appointments among a sample of patients within a multistate health care organization. We also explored patient beliefs about the use of video for health care appointments.

          Methods

          We conducted a 1-time cross-sectional paper survey, mailed between July and December 2022, of patients matching the eligibility criteria: (1) aged ≥18 years as of April 2020, (2) Mayo Clinic Midwest, Florida, or Arizona patient, (3) did not use video appointment services during April-December 2020 but attended F2F appointments in the departments of primary care and psychiatry/psychology. The survey asked patients, “Have you ever had a video appointment with a healthcare provider?” “Yes” respondents were defined as “users” (adapted to video appointments), and “no” respondents were defined as “persistent nonusers” of video appointments. We analyzed demographics, SDoH, and patient beliefs toward video appointments in 2 groups: persistent nonusers of video appointments and users. We used chi-square and 2-tailed t tests for analysis.

          Results

          Our findings indicate that patients who were older, lived in rural areas, sought care at Mayo Clinic Midwest, and did not have access to the patient portal system were likely to be persistent nonusers of video appointments. Only 1 SDoH factor (not having a disability, handicap, or chronic disease) was associated with persistent nonuse of video appointments. Persistent nonusers of video appointments held personal beliefs such as discomfort with video communication, difficulty interpreting nonverbal cues, and personal preference for F2F appointments over video.

          Conclusions

          Our study identified demographic (older age and rural residence), sociodemographic factors (not having a disability, handicap, or chronic disease), and personal beliefs associated with patients’ decisions to choose between video versus F2F appointments for health care delivery. Health care institutions should assess patients’ negative attitudes toward technology prior to introducing them to digital health care services. Failing to do so may result in its restricted usage, negative patient experience, and wasted resources. For patients who hold negative beliefs about technology but are willing to learn, a “digital health coordinator” could be assigned to assist with various digital health solutions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Telehealth for global emergencies: Implications for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

          The current coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is again reminding us of the importance of using telehealth to deliver care, especially as means of reducing the risk of cross-contamination caused by close contact. For telehealth to be effective as part of an emergency response it first needs to become a routinely used part of our health system. Hence, it is time to step back and ask why telehealth is not mainstreamed. In this article, we highlight key requirements for this to occur. Strategies to ensure that telehealth is used regularly in acute, post-acute and emergency situations, alongside conventional service delivery methods, include flexible funding arrangements, training and accrediting our health workforce. Telehealth uptake also requires a significant change in management effort and the redesign of existing models of care. Implementing telehealth proactively rather than reactively is more likely to generate greater benefits in the long-term, and help with the everyday (and emergency) challenges in healthcare.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Evaluating barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide: A systematic review

            Introduction and objective Studies on telemedicine have shown success in reducing the geographical and time obstacles incurred in the receipt of care in traditional modalities with the same or greater effectiveness; however, there are several barriers that need to be addressed in order for telemedicine technology to spread. The aim of this review is to evaluate barriers to adopting telemedicine worldwide through the analysis of published work. Methods The authors conducted a systematic literature review by extracting the data from the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and PubMed (MEDLINE) research databases. The reviewers in this study analysed 30 articles (nine from CINAHL and 21 from Medline) and identified barriers found in the literature. This review followed the checklist from Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2009. The reviewers organized the results into one table and five figures that depict the data in different ways, organized by: barrier, country-specific barriers, organization-specific barriers, patient-specific barriers, and medical-staff and programmer-specific barriers. Results The reviewers identified 33 barriers with a frequency of 100 occurrences through the 30 articles. The study identified the issues with technically challenged staff (11%), followed by resistance to change (8%), cost (8%), reimbursement (5%), age of patient (5%), and level of education of patient (5%). All other barriers occurred at or less than 4% of the time. Discussion and conclusions Telemedicine is not yet ubiquitous, and barriers vary widely. The top barriers are technology-specific and could be overcome through training, change-management techniques, and alternating delivery by telemedicine and personal patient-to-provider interaction. The results of this study identify several barriers that could be eliminated by focused policy. Future work should evaluate policy to identify which one to lever to maximize the results.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Patient Characteristics Associated With Telemedicine Access for Primary and Specialty Ambulatory Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic

              Key Points Question What sociodemographic factors are associated with higher use of telemedicine and the use of video (vs telephone) for telemedicine visits for ambulatory care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic? Findings In this cohort study of 148 402 patients scheduled for primary care and medical specialty ambulatory telemedicine visits at a large academic health system during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, older age, Asian race, non-English language as the patient’s preferred language, and Medicaid were independently associated with fewer completed telemedicine visits. Older age, female sex, Black race, Latinx ethnicity, and lower household income were associated with lower use of video for telemedicine care. Meaning This study identified racial/ethnic, sex, age, language, and socioeconomic differences in accessing telemedicine for primary care and specialty ambulatory care; if not addressed, these differences may compound existing inequities in care among vulnerable populations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIR Form Res
                JMIR Form Res
                JFR
                JMIR Formative Research
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2561-326X
                2024
                24 January 2024
                : 8
                : e50572
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Psychiatry and Psychology Mayo Clinic Health System Eau Claire, WI United States
                [2 ] Quantitative Health Sciences Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN United States
                [3 ] Health Equity and Community Engagement Research Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN United States
                [4 ] Psychology Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN United States
                [5 ] Psychiatry and Psychology Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN United States
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Pravesh Sharma sharma.pravesh@ 123456mayo.edu
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9503-5016
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3340-2017
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4008-4395
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4794-5533
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8095-6966
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0842-3772
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3756-4227
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7566-7334
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7194-8160
                Article
                v8i1e50572
                10.2196/50572
                10851122
                38265855
                4b6d36d3-5c25-42f0-bf55-aea353516581
                ©Pravesh Sharma, Celia Kamath, Tabetha A Brockman, Anne Roche, Pamela Sinicrope, Ruoxiang Jiang, Paul A Decker, Vanessa Pazdernik, Christi Patten. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 24.01.2024.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Formative Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://formative.jmir.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 7 July 2023
                : 11 November 2023
                : 21 November 2023
                : 22 December 2023
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                digital health,telemedicine,telehealth,video visits,appointments,sdoh, social determinants of health,social determinants,appointment,users,sociodemographic,prevention,discomfort,video communication,communication,willingness,mobile phone

                Comments

                Comment on this article