This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Purpose: This study investigated disparities in the uptake of telemedicine and the degree of patient-centeredness of telemedicine consultations among vulnerable patient populations. The focus includes rural adults and adults living with psychological distress and a high risk for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Materials and Methods: In August 2020, a random sample of 932 U.S. adults ≥35 years old with a history of smoking tobacco completed an online survey. Chi-squared analyses were conducted to compare the sociodemographics of participants who did and did not use telemedicine. A series of analysis of variance tests were conducted to examine whether satisfaction with patient-centeredness of telemedicine consultations (i.e., open-endedness, expressed empathy, provider's ability, 5-point Likert scale) differs by rural/urban residence, psychological distress, and COPD risk. Results: About 25% of the sample (n = 240) reported having used telemedicine. Telemedicine use was associated with younger age, Hispanic ethnicity, and moderate-to-high psychological distress, but not rurality. Participants reported high general satisfaction with the patient-centeredness of telemedicine consultations (M = 4.42 ± 0.73). However, high psychological distress and identifying as a current smoker were associated with less satisfaction across all domains. High COPD risk was uniquely associated with less satisfaction in how providers express empathy remotely. Conclusion: Individuals with moderate-to-high psychological distress and a high risk for COPD experience challenges accessing high-quality, patient-centered care via telemedicine. As telemedicine becomes ubiquitous in health care, innovative solutions are needed to overcome barriers that prevent providers from delivering patient-centered care and patients from feeling satisfied with their remote consultations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paige et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: