Jennifer R Mammen1, Molly J Elson2, James J Java3, Christopher A Beck3, Denise B Beran4, Kevin M Biglan5, Cynthia M Boyd6, Peter N Schmidt4, Richard Simone7, Allison W Willis8, E Ray Dorsey2,5. 1. 1 University of Rochester School of Nursing , Rochester, New York. 2. 2 The Center for Health and Technology, University of Rochester Medical Center , Rochester, New York. 3. 3 Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester , Rochester, New York. 4. 4 National Parkinson Foundation , Miami, Florida. 5. 5 Department of Neurology, University of Rochester Medical Center , Rochester, New York. 6. 6 Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland. 7. 7 Simone Consulting , Sunnyvale, California. 8. 8 Departments of Neurology and of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
Background and Introduction: Delivering care through telemedicine directly into the patient's home is increasingly feasible, valuable, and beneficial. However, qualitative data on how patients' and physicians' perceive these virtual house calls are lacking. We conducted a qualitative analysis of perceptions of these visits for Parkinson's disease to (1) determine how patients and physicians perceive virtual visits and (2) identify components contributing to positive and negative perceptions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Qualitative survey data were collected from patients and physicians during a 12-month randomized controlled trial of virtual house calls for Parkinson's disease. Data from 149 cases were analyzed using case-based qualitative content analysis and quantitative sentiment analysis techniques. RESULTS: Positive and negative perceptions of virtual visits were driven by three themes: (1) personal benefits of the virtual visit, (2) perceived quality of care, and (3) perceived quality of interpersonal engagement. In general, participants who identified greater personal benefit, high quality of care, and good interpersonal engagement perceived visits positively. Technical problems with the software were commonly mentioned. The sentiment analysis for patients was strongly favorable (+2.5) and moderately favorable for physicians (+0.8). Physician scores were lowest (-0.3) for the ability to perform a detailed motor examination remotely. DISCUSSION: Patients and providers generally view telemedicine favorably, but individual experiences are dependent on technical issues. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction with and effectiveness of remote care will likely increase as common technical problems are resolved.
RCT Entities:
Background and Introduction: Delivering care through telemedicine directly into the patient's home is increasingly feasible, valuable, and beneficial. However, qualitative data on how patients' and physicians' perceive these virtual house calls are lacking. We conducted a qualitative analysis of perceptions of these visits for Parkinson's disease to (1) determine how patients and physicians perceive virtual visits and (2) identify components contributing to positive and negative perceptions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Qualitative survey data were collected from patients and physicians during a 12-month randomized controlled trial of virtual house calls for Parkinson's disease. Data from 149 cases were analyzed using case-based qualitative content analysis and quantitative sentiment analysis techniques. RESULTS: Positive and negative perceptions of virtual visits were driven by three themes: (1) personal benefits of the virtual visit, (2) perceived quality of care, and (3) perceived quality of interpersonal engagement. In general, participants who identified greater personal benefit, high quality of care, and good interpersonal engagement perceived visits positively. Technical problems with the software were commonly mentioned. The sentiment analysis for patients was strongly favorable (+2.5) and moderately favorable for physicians (+0.8). Physician scores were lowest (-0.3) for the ability to perform a detailed motor examination remotely. DISCUSSION: Patients and providers generally view telemedicine favorably, but individual experiences are dependent on technical issues. CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction with and effectiveness of remote care will likely increase as common technical problems are resolved.
Authors: H Ben-Pazi; P Browne; P Chan; E Cubo; M Guttman; A Hassan; J Hatcher-Martin; Z Mari; E Moukheiber; N U Okubadejo; A Shalash Journal: Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep Date: 2018-04-13 Impact factor: 5.081
Authors: Christopher Leung; Harsh Wadhwa; Matthew Sklar; Kunj Sheth; Sophia Loo; John Ratliff; Corinna C Zygourakis Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2021-03-18 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Thomas F Tropea; Andrea Fuentes; Zachary Roberts; Meredith Spindler; Kristy Yuan; Christopher Perrone; David Do; Dina Jacobs; Lawrence Wechsler Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 5.033
Authors: Andrew M Wilson; Nasheed I Jamal; Eric M Cheng; Moira Inkelas; Debra Saliba; Andrea Hanssen; Jorge A Torres; Michael K Ong Journal: J Neurol Date: 2019-11-03 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Susannah Rose; Heather McKee Hurwitz; Mary Beth Mercer; Sabahat Hizlan; Kari Gali; Pei-Chun Yu; Caroline Franke; Kathryn Martinez; Matthew Stanton; Peter Rasmussen; Adrienne Boissy; Matthew Faiman Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2021-06-21 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Patricia Sánchez-Herrera-Baeza; Roberto Cano-de-la-Cuerda; Edwin Daniel Oña-Simbaña; Domingo Palacios-Ceña; Jorge Pérez-Corrales; Juan Nicolas Cuenca-Zaldivar; Javier Gueita-Rodriguez; Carlos Balaguer-Bernaldo de Quirós; Alberto Jardón-Huete; Alicia Cuesta-Gomez Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-04-11 Impact factor: 3.576