×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Original Clinical Research

Patient Satisfaction and Perception of Physician Empathy in Outpatient Community General Neurology Telemedicine

By
Karen A. Truitt, DO Orcid logo ,
Karen A. Truitt, DO
Kogulavadanan Arumaithurai, MD Orcid logo ,
Kogulavadanan Arumaithurai, MD
Nathan Young, DO Orcid logo
Nathan Young, DO

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: We assessed patients’ satisfaction and perception of physician empathy after implementation of video telemedicine service for general neurology follow-up visits at two community spoke clinics that serve patients in rural areas located approximately 45 miles from a medical center hub. Methods: Consecutive patients who completed a telemedicine neurology follow-up visit from February 12, 2020 to January 13, 2021 at the spoke clinic in Red Wing, MN and from July 21, 2021 to January 21, 2022 at the spoke clinic in Austin, MN were asked to complete a paper-based survey at the conclusion of the telemedicine visit. The neurologist conducted the telemedicine visit from the medical center hub site in Rochester, MN or from their own home using the InTouch (Teladoc Health™) operating system mobile telehealth platform. All patients had previously completed an initial traditional face-to-face consultation at the spoke clinic with the same neurologist performing the follow-up telemedicine visit. Primary outcomes were Telemedicine Patient Satisfaction Measure and Consultation and Relational Empathy scores and mean total favorable survey responses. Results: 31 patients at our clinic in Red Wing, MN and 38 patients at our clinic in Austin, MN participated in telemedicine neurology follow-up visit, completed the survey, and were included in the final analysis. The mean Telemedicine Patient Satisfaction Measure scores (possible score of 12-60) were 55 (range 42-60), and for all items ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’ was rated on average 94% of the time.  The mean Consultation and Relational Empathy scores (possible score of 10–50) were 44 (range 28–50), and for all items ‘very good’ or ‘excellent’ was rated on average 90% of the time.   Both neurologists conducting telemedicine visits reported that this model of care improved work-life balance with reduced travel time. Discussion: We successfully implemented a telemedicine service for general neurology follow-up visits at two community spoke clinics serving patients in rural areas without compromising on perceived care. We were able to bridge the gap between patients’ needs for local care and physicians’ need for work-life balance. Patients’ perception of physician empathy and satisfaction with telemedicine neurology follow-up visits was high. This model of telemedicine avoids the barriers of limited internet access in rural areas and minimizes technology related anxiety that is often present in telemedicine visits to patients’ homes.  This model allowed for high quality neurological examination with high resolution pan-tilt-zoom camera on a mobile platform, incorporation of vital signs, nursing support, and lab services that may have contributed to the patients’ and neurologists’ satisfaction. Our study supports our continuation and expansion of this TM model in our community clinic spoke sites and may help to improve access to neurological care for patients in rural areas. Keywords: Telemedicine, patient satisfaction, empathy, general neurology, teleneurology

References

1.
Dall TM, Storm MV, Chakrabarti R, Drogan O, Keran CM, Donofrio PD, et al. Supply and demand analysis of the current and future US neurology workforce. Neurology. 2013;81(5):470–8.
2.
Lin CC, Callaghan BC, Burke JF, Skolarus LE, Hill CE, Magliocco B, et al. Geographic Variation in Neurologist Density and Neurologic Care in the United States. Neurology. 2021;96(3).
3.
Curtis K, Elrahi S, Bilello J, Rai P. Geographical distribution of neurologists in the United States. Neurology. 2020;(15):727.
4.
Teixeira-Poit SM, Halpern MT, Kane HL, Keating M, Olmsted M. Factors influencing professional life satisfaction among neurologists. BMC Health Services Research. 2017;17(1).
5.
MacDowell M, Glasser M, Fitts M, Nielsen K, Hunaker M. A national view of rural health workforce issues in the USA. Rural and Remote Health. 2010;
6.
Wechsler LR, Tsao JW, Levine SR, Swain-Eng RJ, Adams RJ, Demaerschalk BM, et al. Teleneurology applications. Neurology. 2013;80(7):670–6.
7.
Wallace R, Hughes-Cromwick P, Mull H, Khasnabis S. Access to Health Care and Nonemergency Medical Transportation. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2005;1924(1):76–84.
8.
Salmanizadeh F, Ameri A, Bahaadinbeigy K. Methods of Reimbursement for Telemedicine Services: A Scoping Review. Medical Journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 2022;
9.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 2009;42(2):377–81.
10.
Cheshire WP, Barrett KM, Eidelman BH, Mauricio EA, Huang JF, Freeman WD, et al. Patient perception of physician empathy in stroke telemedicine. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. 2020;27(9):572–81.
11.
Cheshire WP, Barrett KM, Eidelman BH, Mauricio EA, Huang JF, Freeman WD, et al. Patient perception of physician empathy in stroke telemedicine. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. 2020;27(9):572–81.
12.
Wechsler LR, Demaerschalk BM, Schwamm LH, Adeoye OM, Audebert HJ, Fanale CV, et al. Telemedicine Quality and Outcomes in Stroke: A Scientific Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2017;48(1).
13.
Hatcher-Martin JM, Adams JL, Anderson ER, Bove R, Burrus TM, Chehrenama M, et al. Telemedicine in neurology. Neurology. 2020;94(1):30–8.
14.
Olszewski C, Thomson S, Strauss L, Graham R, Ezzeddine M, Dodenhoff K. Patient experiences with ambulatory telehealth in neurology: results of a mixed methods study. Neurology. 2021;(6):484–96.

Citation

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.