Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34660024›Full record

ArticleCureus2021

Patient Satisfaction With Remote Consultations in a Primary Care Setting.

Joseph Anderson, Joanna Walsh, Martin Anderson, Rachel Burnley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Understanding access to general practice through the lens of candidacy: a critical review of the literature.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Review
  14. Media depictions of primary care teleconsultation safety: a thematic analysis of UK newspapers.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Tele-Monitoring Applications in Respiratory Allergy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Joseph AndersonFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, GBR.
Joanna WalshPrimary Care, Whiteladies Medical Group, Bristol, GBR.
Martin AndersonMedical & Biological Sciences, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, GBR.
Rachel BurnleyFaculty of Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction In recent years, the use of remote consultations has increased considerably. Many patient encounters in general practice are now conducted by phone or computer as opposed to traditional face-to-face appointments. The aim of this study was to measure patient satisfaction with remote consultations in a primary care setting. Aims To assess patient satisfaction with telephone consultations in a general practice setting and explore patient's experiences and attitudes toward remote consultations in general practice to formulate recommendations for potential telehealth improvements. Methods A total of 407 patients who had undergone primary care telephone consultations within the previous week were invited to provide feedback. Patient satisfaction was measured by a four-step questionnaire on patient experience, which was quantified on a Likert agreement scale, and the additional option of a comment section at the end of each questionnaire. The responses in the comment section were analysed according to the frequency of recurrent themes. Results The responses of 104 patients were included in the final analysis, and 44 patients used the comment section to provide additional information about their experience. Overall, the satisfaction with remote consultations was high while the rate of technical failure and the need for in-person follow-up were both low: 60 patients (58%) either agreed or strongly agreed that remote consultations are a convenient way of receiving health care and 26 patients (25%) would prefer to have remote consultations over face-to-face ones in the future while 42 patients (40%) would prefer face-to-face consultations in the future. Ninety-six (96) patients (92%) reported no technical problems affecting the consultation quality. Of all 104 face-to-face appointments, only 36 patients (35%) required in-person follow-up. Analyses of the comment section largely reflect the above findings but also highlight concerns from patients that remote consultations can generate additional anxiety, and symptoms might not be communicated effectively or even missed completely. Discussion The high satisfaction levels, low rates of technical failure and low need for a face-to-face follow-up show that in a primary care setting, remote consultations are an effective complement to face-to-face appointments. Nonetheless, the requirement for face-to-face contact goes beyond the need for physical examination alone, with many patients preferring face-to-face contact when discussing complex and sensitive health-related topics and symptoms.

Indexed as

patients satisfactionprimary care medicineremote consultationstelemedicine experiencetelephone consultation

Identifiers

PMID34660024
PMCPMC8498974

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.