Patients' perceptions of communication during in-person and telehealth oncology visits
Recommended Citation
Fridman I, Barrow L, Kinlaw A, Smith A, Stein J, Tam S, Wood W, Neslund-Dudas C. Patients' perceptions of communication during in-person and telehealth oncology visits. Patient Educ Couns 2025; 137.
Document Type
Conference Proceeding
Publication Date
8-1-2025
Publication Title
Patient Educ Couns
Abstract
Background: With COVID-19, telehealth appointments were introduced in oncology practices. Although use has declined, many practices continue to offer them. Given the importance of communication to patient outcomes, we evaluated patients’ perceptions during telehealth appointments relative to in-person visits. Methods: Using electronic health records from two academic health systems, we identified adults aged 21+ who received cancer treatment within the last three years. We approached all patients with scheduled cancer-related telehealth appointments and randomly selected among in-person appointments between 4/22-4/23, oversampling Black adults. Eligible patients received a study introduction letter followed by telephone call(s) to invite participation in a pre- and post-visit survey. Participants received a $25 incentive. Post-visit survey contained items with Likert responses to assess patients’ perceptions of provider care quality (engagement, time spent, privacy, etc.) and communication (clarity, listening, respect etc.). We evaluated differences in post-survey items by visit type (in-person vs. telehealth, video, and telephone), using ANOVA and t-tests, as appropriate. Findings: 669 patients completed the post-visit survey, 122 had a telehealth visit (n=72 video; n=50 telephone). Mean age was 63.4 years (SD=13.0), 68% female, 79% some college/college degree, and 24% reported fair/poor health. In-person visits were more likely to be attended by female (71 vs. 51%) and Black adults (46 vs. 16%), and less likely to be attended by married (vs. unmarried) adults (55 vs. 70%). We found no statistically significant differences (p>0.10) in any of the perceived quality or communication items by visit format, with each item generally rated positively (range 71% to 98%). The one exception was perceived privacy where 76% of those attending in-person strongly agreed/agreed vs. 64% telehealth video. (p<0.03). Discussion: Despite participants rating quality and communication positively regardless of visit format, concerns regarding privacy during video visits warrant consideration by oncology practices as this concern has now been found repeatedly, particularly among marginalized populations.
Volume
137
