z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Preference for Telehealth Sustained Over Three Months at an Outpatient Center for Integrative Medicine
Author(s) -
Michael T. M. Finn,
H. R. Brown,
Emily R. Friedman,
A. Gracie Kelly,
Kathryn Hansen
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
global advances in health and medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2164-957X
pISSN - 2164-9561
DOI - 10.1177/2164956121997361
Subject(s) - telehealth , center (category theory) , preference , family medicine , integrative medicine , medicine , psychology , alternative medicine , medical education , telemedicine , health care , political science , pathology , economics , chemistry , microeconomics , law , crystallography
Background Integrative medicine is a key framework for the treatment of chronic medical conditions, particularly chronic pain conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted rapid implementation of telehealth services.Objective We present outcomes of a complete and rapid transition to telehealth visits at an outpatient integrative medicine center in the Southeastern United States.Method Patients and administrative staff took surveys comparing telehealth to in-person visits within four weeks of our clinic's transition to telehealth and three months later. Beginning four weeks after the clinic’s telehealth conversion in March 2020, patients who had a telehealth visit at the center completed a survey about their telehealth experience and another survey three months later.Results Patient quality judgements significantly favored telehealth at baseline, B = .77 [0.29 – 1.25], SE = .25, t(712) = 3.15, p = .002, and increased at three months, B = .27 [–0.03 – 0.57], SE = .15, t(712) = 1.76, p = .079. Telehealth technology usability and distance from the center predicted patient ratings of telehealth favorability. Providers favored in-person visits more than patients, B = –1.00 [–1.56 – –0.44], SE = .29, t(799) = –3.48, p < .001, though did not favor either in-person or telehealth more than the other. Patient discrete choice between telehealth and in-person visits was split at baseline (in-person: n = 86 [54%]; telehealth: n = 73 [46%]), but favored telehealth at three months (in-person: n = 17 [40%]; telehealth: n = 26 [60%]). Overall, discrete choice favored telehealth at follow-up across providers and patients, OR = 2.69 [.1.18 – 6.14], z = 2.36, p = .018. Major qualitative themes highlight telehealth as acceptable and convenient, with some challenges including technological issues. Some felt a loss of interpersonal connection during telehealth visits, while others felt the opposite.Conclusion We report converging mixed-method data on the successful and sustained implementation of telehealth with associated policy and clinical implications during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom