Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39232645›Full record

ArticleBMC primary care2024

Communication during telemedicine consultations in general practice: perspectives from general practitioners and their patients.

Amy D Nguyen, Sarah J White, Tim Tse, John A Cartmill, Peter Roger, Sarah Hatem, Simon M Willcock

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC primary care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Amy D NguyenCentre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia. Amy.nguyen@mq.edu.au.
Sarah J WhiteCentre for Social Impact, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Tim TseDepartment of Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
John A CartmillMacquarie Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Peter RogerDepartment of Linguistics, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Sarah HatemDepartment of Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Simon M WillcockDepartment of Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

Avant Foundation 2021_000011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelemedicine allows delivery of healthcare to occur between parties that are not in the same location. As telemedicine users are not co-present, effective communication methods are crucial to the delivery and reception of information. The aim of this study was to explore perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and patients on the interactional components of telemedicine consultations.

methodsSemi-structured qualitative interviews were held with telemedicine users; 15 GPs and nine patients self-selected from a larger telemedicine study. Participants were asked about their preparation for telemedicine consultations, conducting telemedicine consultations and post-consultation activities. Deidentified transcripts from the interviews were analysed thematically.

resultsGPs and patients discussed factors they used to decide whether a consultation would be best conducted by telemedicine or in-person; the condition to be discussed, the existing doctor-patient relationship and whether physical examination was required. Participants also described how they prepared for their telemedicine consultations, gathering relevant documents, and reading previous notes. Participants described strategies they employed to optimise the telemedicine interaction; improving conversational flow and building rapport, as well as difficulties they experienced when trying to provide and receive care via telemedicine.

conclusionsPatient factors including health literacy and familiarity with technology affect the transfer of information shared during telemedicine consultations and consideration of these factors when choosing patients for telemedicine is required. Many GPs and patients have innate communication skills to effectively deliver and receive care through telemedicine. However, they may not be aware of these subconscious techniques to use to optimise telemedicine consultations. Communication training could be delivered to increase conversational flow, build rapport, and establish safety netting.

Indexed as

CommunicationGeneral PracticeGeneral PractitionersPhysician-Patient RelationsTelemedicineAdultAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchRemote ConsultationCommunicationGeneral practicePrimary careTelehealthTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39232645
PMCPMC11373490

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.