Steven M Albert1, Grant J Shevchik, Suzanne Paone, G Daniel Martich. 1. Department of Behavioral and Community Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261, USA. smalbert@pitt.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Internet-based medical visits, or "structured e-Visits," allow patients to report symptoms and seek diagnosis and treatment from their doctor over a secure Web site, without calling or visiting the physician's office. While acceptability of e-Visits has been investigated, outcomes associated with e-Visits, that is, whether patients receiving diagnoses receive appropriate care or need to return to the doctor, remain unexplored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The first 156 e-Visit users from a large family medicine practice were surveyed regarding their experience with the e-Visit and e-Visit outcomes. In addition, medical records for patients making e-Visits were reviewed to examine need for follow-up care within 7 days. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 121 patients (77.6% participation). The most common type of e-Visit was for "other" symptoms or concerns (37%), followed by sinus/cold symptoms (35%). Back pain, urinary symptoms, cough, diarrhea, conjunctivitis, and vaginal irritation were each less frequent (<10%). A majority, 61% completed e-Visits with their own physician. The majority of patients (57.0%) reported receipt of a diagnosis without need for follow-up beyond a prescription; 75% of patients thought the e-Visit was as good as or better than an in-person visit, and only 11.6% felt that their concerns or questions were incompletely addressed. In a review of medical records, 16.9% had a follow-up visit within 7 days, mostly for the same condition. Four of these were on the same day as the e-Visit, including one emergency department visit. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for the e-Visit suggest that it is an appropriate and potentially cost-saving addition to in-person delivery of primary care.
OBJECTIVE: Internet-based medical visits, or "structured e-Visits," allow patients to report symptoms and seek diagnosis and treatment from their doctor over a secure Web site, without calling or visiting the physician's office. While acceptability of e-Visits has been investigated, outcomes associated with e-Visits, that is, whether patients receiving diagnoses receive appropriate care or need to return to the doctor, remain unexplored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The first 156 e-Visit users from a large family medicine practice were surveyed regarding their experience with the e-Visit and e-Visit outcomes. In addition, medical records for patients making e-Visits were reviewed to examine need for follow-up care within 7 days. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 121 patients (77.6% participation). The most common type of e-Visit was for "other" symptoms or concerns (37%), followed by sinus/cold symptoms (35%). Back pain, urinary symptoms, cough, diarrhea, conjunctivitis, and vaginal irritation were each less frequent (<10%). A majority, 61% completed e-Visits with their own physician. The majority of patients (57.0%) reported receipt of a diagnosis without need for follow-up beyond a prescription; 75% of patients thought the e-Visit was as good as or better than an in-person visit, and only 11.6% felt that their concerns or questions were incompletely addressed. In a review of medical records, 16.9% had a follow-up visit within 7 days, mostly for the same condition. Four of these were on the same day as the e-Visit, including one emergency department visit. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for the e-Visit suggest that it is an appropriate and potentially cost-saving addition to in-person delivery of primary care.
Authors: Ateev Mehrotra; Hangsheng Liu; John L Adams; Margaret C Wang; Judith R Lave; N Marcus Thygeson; Leif I Solberg; Elizabeth A McGlynn Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-09-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ateev Mehrotra; Suzanne Paone; G Daniel Martich; Steven M Albert; Grant J Shevchik Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2013-05-19 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Oliver T Nguyen; Amir Alishahi Tabriz; Jinhai Huo; Karim Hanna; Christopher M Shea; Kea Turner Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Simon de Lusignan; Freda Mold; Aziz Sheikh; Azeem Majeed; Jeremy C Wyatt; Tom Quinn; Mary Cavill; Toto Anne Gronlund; Christina Franco; Umesh Chauhan; Hannah Blakey; Neha Kataria; Fiona Barker; Beverley Ellis; Phil Koczan; Theodoros N Arvanitis; Mary McCarthy; Simon Jones; Imran Rafi Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-09-08 Impact factor: 2.692