The feasibility, acceptability, and usability of telehealth visits
Open accessAbstract
Background: Telemedicine is now common practice for many fields of medicine, but questions remain as to whether telemedicine will continue as an important patient care modality once COVID-19 becomes endemic. We explored provider and patients’ perspectives on telemedicine implementation. Methods: Physicians from three specialties within the Department of Medicine of a single institution were electronically surveyed regarding their perceptions of satisfaction, benefits, and challenges of video visits, as well as the quality of interactions with patients. Patients were surveyed via telephone by the Survey Research Group at Cornell about participation in video visits, challenges encountered, perceived benefits, preferences for care, and overall satisfaction. Results: Providers reported an overwhelmingly positive experience with video visits, with the vast majority agreeing that they were comfortable with the modality (98%) and that it was easy to interact with patients (92%). Most providers (72%) wanted to have more telemedicine encounters in the future. Key factors interfering with successful telemedicine encounters were technical challenges and insufficient technical support. Overall, patients also perceived video visits very positively regarding ease of communication and care received and had few privacy concerns. Some (10%–15%) patients expressed interest in receiving more technical support and training. There was a gradient of satisfaction with telemedicine across specialties with patients receiving weight management reporting more favorable responses while patients with lymphoma expressed more mixed responses. Conclusion: Both providers and patients found telemedicine to be an acceptable and useful modality to provide or receive medical care. The principal barrier to successful encounters was technical challenges.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Digital literacy, language, access to devices, reliable internet connectivity, and confidence using technology affected participation across several studies.
“Digital literacy, language, access to devices, reliable internet connectivity, and confidence using technology affected participation across several studies [25,37,46,48,50,58].”
From Digital health technologies in oncology services: A scoping review of clinical implementation, organisational evidence gaps, and policy implications (2026) · cites this paper as [25]
The Results (provider survey; page not provided) identify lack of needed technology and poor internet connectivity as challenges to video visits. The Discussion also links low technical skills and comfort with technology to telehealth difficulties. Our copy does not identify language as a participation barrier, so it supports only part of the multi-citation sentence. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Eberly, L. A., Kallan, M. J., Julien, H. M., Haynes, N., Khatana, S. A. M., Nathan, A. S., Snider, C., Chokshi, N. P., Eneanya, N. D., Takvorian, S. U., et al. (2020) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.31640 · Cited by 740 · see citing works
Bitar, H., & Alismail, S. (2021) · DIGITAL HEALTH · doi:10.1177/20552076211009396 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
Gentry, M. T., Puspitasari, A. J., McKean, A. J., Williams, M. D., Breitinger, S., Geske, J. R., Clark, M. M., Moore, K. M., Frye, M. A., & Hilty, D. M. (2021) · Telemedicine and e-Health · doi:10.1089/tmj.2020.0575 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Telemedicine consultation for patients with diabetes mellitus: A cluster randomised controlled trial
Sood, A., Watts, S. A., Johnson, J. K., Hirth, S., & Aron, D. C. (2018) · Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare · doi:10.1177/1357633x17704346 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- [2]Garfan S Alamoodi AH Zaidan BB Al-Zobbi M Hamid RA Alwan JK. Telehealth utilization during the Covid-19 pandemic: a systematic review. Comput Biol Med. (2021) 138: 104878. doi: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104878 34592585 PMC8450049 · DOI · Paper page
- [3]Seifert A Batsis JA Smith AC. Telemedicine in long-term care facilities during and beyond COVID-19: challenges caused by the Digital divide. Front Public Health. (2020) 8: 1595. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.601595 PMC7649197 33194999 · DOI
- [4]Shirke MM Shaikh SA Harky A. Implications of telemedicine in oncology during the COVID-19 pandemic. Acta Biomed. (2020) 91: e2020022. doi: 10.23750/abm.v91i3.9849 PMC7716949 32921719 · DOI
- [5]Anthony DL Campos-Castillo C Lim PS. Who Isn’t using patient portals and why? Evidence and implications from a National Sample of US adults. Health Aff. (2018) 37: 1948– 54. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05117, PMID: 30633673 · DOI
- [6]Şahin E Yavuz Veizi BG Naharci MI. Telemedicine interventions for older adults: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. (2021): 1357633X2110583. doi: 10.1177/1357633X211058340 34825609 · DOI
- [8]Bohingamu Mudiyanselage S Stevens J Watts JJ Toscano J Kotowicz MA Steinfort CL. Personalised telehealth intervention for chronic disease management: a pilot randomised controlled trial. J Telemed Telecare. (2018) 25: 343– 52. doi: 10.1177/1357633X18775850, PMID: 29793387 · DOI
- [9]Wootton R. Twenty years of telemedicine in chronic disease management–an evidence synthesis. J Telemed Telecare. (2012) 18: 211– 20. doi: 10.1258/jtt.2012.120219, PMID: 22674020 PMC3366107 · DOI · Paper page
- [10]Boscari F Ferretto S Uliana A Avogaro A Bruttomesso D. Efficacy of telemedicine for persons with type 1 diabetes during Covid19 lockdown. Nutr Diabetes. (2021) 11. doi: 10.1038/s41387-020-00147-8 PMC7790327 33414391 · DOI
- [12]Chang PJ Jay GM Kalpakjian C Andrews C Smith S. Patient and provider-reported satisfaction of Cancer rehabilitation telemedicine visits during the COVID -19 pandemic. PMR. (2021) 13: 1362– 8. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.12552, PMID: 33455066 PMC8013293 · DOI
- [13]Volcy J Smith W Mills K Peterson A Kene-Ewulu I McNair M. Assessment of patient and provider satisfaction with the change to telehealth from in-person visits at an academic safety net institution during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Am Board Fam Med. (2021) 34: S71– 6. doi: 10.3122/jabfm.2021.S1.200393, PMID: 33622821 · DOI
- [15]Smrke A Younger E Wilson R Husson O Farag S Merry E. Telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic: impact on Care for Rare Cancers. JCO Glob Oncol. (2020) 6: 1046– 51. doi: 10.1200/go.20.00220, PMID: 32639877 PMC7392777 · DOI
- [17]Lohnberg JA Salcido L Frayne S Mahtani N Bates C Hauser ME. Rapid conversion to virtual obesity care in COVID-19: impact on patient care, interdisciplinary collaboration, and training. Obes Sci Pract. (2021) 8: 131– 6. doi: 10.1002/osp4.550, PMID: 34540265 PMC8441727 · DOI
- [18]Vosburg RW Robinson KA Gao C Kim JJ. Patient and provider satisfaction with telemedicine in a comprehensive weight management program. Telemed J e-Health. (2022) 28: 384– 90. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2021.0077 33913743 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tsitsi, T., Polychronis, G., Papoui, E., Cloconi, C., Michail, K., & Charalambous, A. (2026) · Journal of Cancer Policy · doi:10.1016/j.jcpo.2026.100789
- Authors
- Sinha Gregory, N., Shukla, A. P., Noel, J. J., Alonso, L. C., Moxley, J., Crawford, A. J., Martin, P., Kumar, S., Leonard, J. P., & Czaja, S. J.
- Affiliations
- Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
- Cornell University (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Frontiers in Medicine
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2023-07-19
- Volume
- 10
- Pages
- 1198096-1198096
- ISSN
- 2296-858X (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10394377
- OpenAlex
- W4384828247
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 7.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
- Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
- Keywords
- telemedicine, video consultation, physician perceptions, patient satisfaction, acceptability, usability, technical challenges, technical support, COVID-19 pandemic, weight management, lymphoma, patient privacy concerns, physician-patient communication
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review