Comparison of patient satisfaction measures between in-person and telemedicine postoperative appointments following third molar surgery

Champion, Allen F.; Congiusta, Anthony; Yagnik, A.

doi:10.1016/j.ijom.2020.12.012

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The adoption of telehealth early in the pandemic (particularly for RP visits) is documented in the literature; specifically in oral surgery wherein telehealth has been noted to decrease the number of inperson follow-up visits with higher perceived cost-effectiveness and satisfaction, compared with in-person visits. 4,5 The continued demand for and utilization of telehealth, especially for RP visits, confirm its viability as a treatment modality for OM and OMFS. Furthermore, based on the surveyed providers' feedback, telehealth is considered to be a beneficial addition to the two specialties not only as an effective complement to in-person encounters, but also as an instrument that has allowed for an increase in delivery and/or access to their specialized services.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Telehealth Utilization in Oral Medicine and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Miranda-Hoover,

He,

Chau

et al. 2024

Telemedicine and e-Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The objectives of this retrospective study were to analyze telehealth utilization for two specialty care practices: oral medicine (OM) and oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) during the first 2 years of the pandemic, its impact as a new treatment modality and on participating providers, as well as identify the type of patient visit that most readily adopted telehealth. Methods: Retrospective study of patients who sought specialty services, OM and OMFS, at an outpatient clinic in a university health system setting between March 1, 2019, and February 28, 2022. Source data were obtained from Epic, an electronic medical record application. Data were graphed using Tableau and Microsoft Excel software. Statistical analysis was performed utilizing chi-squared test and analysis of variance (ANOVA).Results: OMFS utilized telehealth 12% of the time, and OM 8% of the time. The majority (87%) of telehealth visits were for return patients (RPs). Compared with the first year of the pandemic, there was a decrease in the number of telehealth visits in the second year (p = 0.0001). As of August 2022, new patient (NP) telehealth encounters have largely returned to prepandemic levels (0-1.5%), whereas RP telehealth visits remained at an average level of 11.4% (9.4-12.4%). Surveyed providers consider telehealth as an effective complement to inperson care and will continue its use (4.2/5 Likert scale). Conclusions: Telehealth has become a viable pathway of care for OM and OMFS who previously did not utilize the remote platform to deliver healthcare. As a new treatment modality, telehealth is perceived as impactful in increasing access to specialty care by participating providers. NP visits are now almost completely in person, but telehealth continues for RPs. Ongoing demand for telehealth highlights urgency to develop appropriate standards and effective remote diagnostic/ monitoring tools to maximize telehealth's capability to leverage finite health care resources and increase access to specialty care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Telehealth Utilization in Oral Medicine and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Miranda-Hoover,

He,

Chau

et al. 2024

Telemedicine and e-Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, the telemedicine group did not have to take time off from work and was able to save the opportunity costs. 8 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of these studies were clinician and patient satisfaction surveys. 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 A survey study conducted by Al-Izzi et al amid COVID-19 pandemic to assess clinician and patient desire and willingness for virtual consultations in maxillofacial surgery concluded that teleconsultations were well accepted by all clinicians. Additionally, they also noted that 149 out of 151 (98.7%) were able to complete planned treatment based on the working diagnosis established during the virtual consultations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Telemedicine Consultations in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Gangwani

Mooneyham

Feng

et al. 2023

Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Many studies used questionnaires, qualitative interviews and text mining of the online review content to understand the nature of online reviews 17–20. They often focused on the patient-centred quality aspects such as patient outcomes,21 patient satisfaction22 23 and doctor–patient relationship24–26 rather than the technical quality of care (physician adherence to guideline recommendations, diagnostic accuracy and treatment appropriateness). Even for patient-centred quality, such as patient satisfaction, studies from Widmer et al 27 and Ryan et al 28 found no significant correlation between physicians' online review ratings and patient satisfaction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of patients' online reviews at direct-to-consumer teleconsultation platforms: a protocol for a cross-sectional study using unannounced standardised patients

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAs direct-to-consumer teleconsultation (hereafter referred to as ‘teleconsultation’) has gained popularity, an increasing number of patients have been leaving online reviews of their teleconsultation experiences. These reviews can help guide patients in identifying doctors for teleconsultation. However, few studies have examined the validity of online reviews in assessing the quality of teleconsultation against a gold standard. Therefore, we aim to use unannounced standardised patients (USPs) to validate online reviews in assessing both the technical and patient-centred quality of teleconsultations. We hypothesise that online review results will be more consistent with the patient-centred quality, rather than the technical quality, as assessed by the USPs.Methods and analysisIn this cross-sectional study, USPs representing 11 common primary care conditions will randomly visit 253 physicians via the three largest teleconsultation platforms in China. Each physician will receive a text-based and a voice/video-based USP visit, resulting in a total of 506 USP visits. The USP will complete a quality checklist to assess the proportion of clinical practice guideline-recommended items during teleconsultation. After each visit, the USP will also complete the Patient Perception of Patient-Centeredness Rating. The USP-assessed results will be compared with online review results using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). If ICC >0.4 (p<0.05), we will assume reasonable concordance between the USP-assessed quality and online reviews. Furthermore, we will use correlation analysis, Lin’s Coordinated Correlation Coefficient and Kappa as supplementary analyses.Ethics and disseminationThis study has received approval from the Institutional Review Board of Southern Medical University (#Southern Medical Audit (2022) No. 013). Results will be actively disseminated through print and social media, and USP tools will be made available for other researchers.Trial registrationThe study has been registered at the China Clinical Trials Registry (ChiCTR2200062975).

show abstract

Comparison of patient satisfaction measures between in-person and telemedicine postoperative appointments following third molar surgery

Cited by 8 publications

References 8 publications

Telehealth Utilization in Oral Medicine and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Telehealth Utilization in Oral Medicine and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Accuracy of Telemedicine Consultations in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Validity of patients' online reviews at direct-to-consumer teleconsultation platforms: a protocol for a cross-sectional study using unannounced standardised patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About