↓ Skip to main content

Patients’ Satisfaction with and Preference for Telehealth Visits

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 8,212)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
61 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
29 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
415 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
640 Mendeley
Title
Patients’ Satisfaction with and Preference for Telehealth Visits
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11606-015-3489-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer M. Polinski, Tobias Barker, Nancy Gagliano, Andrew Sussman, Troyen A. Brennan, William H. Shrank

Abstract

One-quarter of U.S. patients do not have a primary care provider or do not have complete access to one. Work and personal responsibilities also compete with finding convenient, accessible care. Telehealth services facilitate patients' access to care, but whether patients are satisfied with telehealth is unclear. We assessed patients' satisfaction with and preference for telehealth visits in a telehealth program at CVS MinuteClinics. Cross-sectional patient satisfaction survey. Patients were aged ≥18 years, presented at a MinuteClinic offering telehealth in January-September 2014, had symptoms suitable for telehealth consultation, and agreed to a telehealth visit when the on-site practitioner was busy. Patients reported their age, gender, and whether they had health insurance and/or a primary care provider. Patients rated their satisfaction with seeing diagnostic images, hearing and seeing the remote practitioner, the assisting on-site nurse's capability, quality of care, convenience, and overall understanding. Patients ranked telehealth visits compared to traditional ones: better (defined as preferring telehealth), just as good (defined as liking telehealth), or worse. Predictors of preferring or liking telehealth were assessed via multivariate logistic regression. In total, 1734 (54 %) of 3303 patients completed the survey: 70 % were women, and 41 % had no usual place of care. Between 94 and 99 % reported being "very satisfied" with all telehealth attributes. One-third preferred a telehealth visit to a traditional in-person visit. An additional 57 % liked telehealth. Lack of medical insurance increased the odds of preferring telehealth (OR = 0.83, 95 % CI, 0.72-0.97). Predictors of liking telehealth were female gender (OR = 1.68, 1.04-2.72) and being very satisfied with their overall understanding of telehealth (OR = 2.76, 1.84-4.15), quality of care received (OR = 2.34, 1.42-3.87), and telehealth's convenience (OR = 2.87, 1.09-7.94) CONCLUSIONS: Patients reported high satisfaction with their telehealth experience. Convenience and perceived quality of care were important to patients, suggesting that telehealth may facilitate access to care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 640 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 639 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 77 12%
Student > Bachelor 75 12%
Researcher 54 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 51 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 6%
Other 123 19%
Unknown 220 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 164 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 96 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 19 3%
Social Sciences 18 3%
Psychology 17 3%
Other 80 13%
Unknown 246 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 506. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2023.
All research outputs
#51,157
of 25,517,918 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#50
of 8,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#443
of 276,430 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,517,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,430 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.