Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36815005›Full record

ArticleDigital health

Predictors of patients' acceptance of video consultation in general practice during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic applying the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model.

André Esber, Martin Teufel, Lisa Jahre, Jürgen In der Schmitten, Eva-Maria Skoda, Alexander Bäuerle

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Patient acceptance of video consultations in cardiology.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

André EsberClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Martin TeufelClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Lisa JahreClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Jürgen In der SchmittenInstitute of General Practice, Center for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences, Medical Faculty, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Eva-Maria SkodaClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Alexander BäuerleClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1488-8592
University of Duisburg-Essen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has led to an increase in remote consultations in health care. This study aimed to assess the acceptance of video consultation as an alternative to face-to-face in-office visits in general practice (GP) and to investigate its drivers and barriers. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Germany during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic from December 2020 to April 2021. Participants were recruited among patients in 16 GP surgeries. Assessed were sociodemographic and medical data as well as information and communications technology related data. Acceptance of video consultation and its predictors were determined using a modified questionnaire based on a short version of the renowned unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model. Results: In total, 371 participants were included in the data analysis. Acceptance of video consultation was moderate. A hierarchical regression revealed acceptance was significantly predicted by the PHQ-2, taking no regular medication, computer proficiency, knowledge about digital health care solutions, no prior use of video consultation, and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology predictors performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence. The extended unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model explained significantly more variance than the restricted unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model in acceptance of video consultation. Conclusions: In this study computer proficiency, existing knowledge about digital health care solutions and depressive symptoms functioned as drivers to acceptance, no prior use of video consultation could be identified as a potential barrier. Patients with regular medication have been particularly receptive to video consultation. The study confirmed the validity of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model in determining acceptance of video consultation. Considering that there is growing demand and acceptance for different approaches to engage with health care providers, additional steps should be taken to establish video consultation as a genuine alternative.

Indexed as

general practiceremote consultationTelemedicine < generalunified theory of acceptance and use of technologyvideoconferencing

Identifiers

PMID36815005
PMCPMC9940186
OpenAlexW4317376824

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.