Published on in Vol 7, No 12 (2020): December

Preprints (earlier versions) of this paper are available at https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/24761, first published .
Patient Attitudes Toward Telepsychiatry During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Nationwide, Multisite Survey

Patient Attitudes Toward Telepsychiatry During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Nationwide, Multisite Survey

Patient Attitudes Toward Telepsychiatry During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Nationwide, Multisite Survey

Original Paper

1Department of Psychiatry, The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, United States

2Center for Psychiatric Neuroscience, Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, NY, United States

3The Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Manhasset, NY, United States

4Vanguard Research Group, Glen Oaks, NY, United States

5Ambulatory Care Division, The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, United States

Corresponding Author:

Daniel Guinart, MD

Department of Psychiatry

The Zucker Hillside Hospital

Northwell Health

7559 263rd St

New York, NY

United States

Phone: 1 7184704139

Email: daniguinart@gmail.com


Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and its associated movement restrictions forced a rapid and massive transition to telepsychiatry to successfully maintain care continuity.

Objective: The aim of this study is to examine a large number of patients’ experiences of, use of, and attitudes toward telepsychiatry.

Methods: An anonymous 11-question survey was delivered electronically to 14,000 patients receiving telepsychiatry care at 18 participating centers across 11 US states between the months of April and June 2020, including questions about their age and length of service use, as well as experience and satisfaction with telepsychiatry on a 5-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze and report data.

Results: In total, 3070 patients with different age ranges participated. The overall experience using telepsychiatry was either excellent or good for 1189 (82.2%) participants using video and 2312 (81.5%) using telephone. In addition, 1922 (63.6%) patients either agreed or strongly agreed that remote treatment sessions (telephone or video) have been just as helpful as in-person treatment. Lack of commute (n=1406, 46.1%) and flexible scheduling/rescheduling (n=1389, 45.5%) were frequently reported advantages of telepsychiatry, whereas missing the clinic/hospital (n=936, 30.7%) and not feeling as connected to their doctor/nurse/therapist (n=752, 24.6%) were the most frequently reported challenges. After the current pandemic resolves, 1937 (64.2%) respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that they would consider using remote treatment sessions in the future.

Conclusions: Telepsychiatry is very well perceived among a large sample of patients. After the current pandemic resolves, some patients may benefit from continued telepsychiatry, but longitudinal studies are needed to assess impact on clinical outcomes and determine whether patients’ perceptions change over time.

JMIR Ment Health 2020;7(12):e24761

doi:10.2196/24761

Keywords



The outcomes and cost-effectiveness of telepsychiatry are overall comparable to in-person care across multiple treatment modalities, disorders, and patient groups [1-11]. However, widespread implementation of telepsychiatry has been challenging [12-14], partially due to mental health care professionals’ concerns about patients’ ability to use conferencing devices, lack of sense of closeness/connection, technical problems, and reimbursement and privacy concerns [15,16]. However, barriers related to patient preference are also possible, and the patient perspective is crucial to further characterize implementation challenges. Previous studies showed positive patient satisfaction [17-19] but potential limitations including relatively small sample sizes and/or selection biases in the context of pilot programs or specific services may have limited their generalizability.

Due to the COVID-19 crisis, our health care system and others around the world rapidly transitioned all or almost all in-person visits to remote assessments [20], in an unprecedented context of mental health care professional stress and increased need for mental health services [21,22]. This revolution in telepsychiatry provided a unique opportunity to assess how patients that may not have initially opted for telepsychiatry feel about it. Hence, the aim of this study was to qualitatively assess opinions and attitudes about telepsychiatry of a large sample of patients.


In collaboration with the Vanguard Research Group (VRG), a research consortium specializing in behavioral health, an anonymous survey was distributed to patients using telepsychiatry in 18 hospitals and community centers located in rural, suburban, small urban, and large urban areas in 11 different states across the United States (Connecticut, Florida, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah). Surveys were distributed through email and/or embedded into the video platform scheduling invitations between the months of April and June 2020, and could be completed electronically, with computers, tablets, or smartphones. Study procedures were deemed exempt by the local Institutional Review Board (IRB#20-0397). Further details can be found on the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) [23] listed in Multimedia Appendix 1.

The survey included 11 questions about telepsychiatry use and satisfaction using a 5-point Likert scale, as well as inquiries about both potential challenges and positive experiences (see survey in Multimedia Appendix 2). Descriptive statistics were used to report qualitative survey results. Chi-square tests were used to compare categorical variables. First, omnibus comparisons were conducted by age range and length of care at the same institution. If statistically significant differences were detected, we then tested the individual interactions of interest post hoc. All analyses were conducted using JMP (Version 13, SAS Institute Inc).


The survey was distributed to approximately 14,000 patients, of which 3070 (22%) completed it. In total, 18 surveys were excluded due to the subject disclosing not having used telemedicine. Hence, 3052 surveys were included in the analysis. Patient characteristics are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Characteristics of the patients included in the study.
CharacteristicsPatients, n (%)
Age range, years (N=3040)

<25304 (10.0)

25-34494 (16.3)

35-44576 (18.9)

45-54680 (22.4)

55-64721 (23.7)

65-74232 (7.6)

>7433 (1.1)
Duration of care, years (N=2994)

<1793 (26.5)

1-51335 (44.6)

5-10493 (16.4)

>10373 (12.5)

Briefly, 55% of the sample (n=1666) were aged >45 years and the majority of participants (n=2128, 71.1%) had been under care at the institution where the survey took place for ≤5 years (Table 1). Respondents were mostly using telephone (n=1924, 63.7%), followed by video (n=708, 23.4%), and a combination of telephone and video (n=390, 12.9%). When asked about their preferred method of receiving care, respondents preferred the telephone over video (n=1908, 64.1% versus n=1066, 35.9%).

The overall experience was either good or excellent for 2312 (81.5%) of respondents when asked about telephone only and for 1189 (82.2%) when asked about video (Figure 1). Only 127 (4.5%) and 74 (5.1%) respondents rated their experience as “poor” or “very poor” for telephone and video, respectively (Figure 1).

Figure 1. (A) Patients' experience of receiving mental health care via telephone, rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0=very poor to 5=excellent. (B) Patients' experience of receiving mental health care via video, rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0=very poor to 5=excellent.
View this figure

We detected differences in the overall experience by age range in the case of telephone, χ²24 (n=2831)=46.3, P=.004; a lower proportion of patients aged 55-64 years declared their experience as excellent compared to other age groups (n=257, 38.2% versus n=960, 44.3%), χ²4 (n=2840)=12.8, P=.01. In addition, a higher proportion of patients aged 45-54 years rated their experience as poor compared to other age groups (n=27, 4.2% versus n=55, 2.5%), χ²4 (n=2840)=10.5, P=.03.

Further, 1922 (63.6%) patients either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that remote treatment sessions (telephone or video) have been just as helpful as in-person treatment, whereas 1937 (64.2%) of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that they would consider using remote treatment sessions in the future (Figure 2). Patients using video were more likely to strongly agree with that statement than those using telephone (n= 570, 38.9% versus n= 273, 29.9%), χ²4 (n=2605)=29.6, P<.001.

Figure 2. (A) Patients' degree of agreement with the statement "I feel the remote treatment sessions have been just as helpful as in-person treatment,” rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." (B) Patients' degree of agreement with the statement "I would consider using remote treatment sessions in the future," rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree.".
View this figure

Patients endorsed the lack of commute (n=1406, 46.1%), flexible scheduling/rescheduling (n=1389, 45.5%), reduced likelihood of missing appointments (n=1064, 39.9%), and feeling more confidence/comfort than in person (n=601, 19.7%) as positive elements/advantages of telepsychiatry (Table 2), which did not vary by age (χ²18 [n=4447]=15.4, P=.64) or length of time under care (χ²9 [n=4413]=10.7, P=.30). Some of the challenges that patients endorsed were related to missing the clinic/hospital (n=936, 30.7%) and not feeling as connected to their doctor/nurse/therapist (n=752, 24.6%), among others (Table 2). Patients under care for less than one year endorsed missing the clinic and feeling connected to it less frequently than other groups (n=195, 21.6% versus n=741, 28%), χ²6 (n=3550)=21.5, P=.002.

Table 2. Patient-reported advantages and challenges related to the use of telepsychiatry (N=3052).
Advantages and challengesParticipants, n (%)a
Positive elements of telepsychiatry

I like not having to commute to the clinic1406 (46.1)

Flexible scheduling/rescheduling1389 (45.5)

I am less likely to miss appointments1064 (34.9)

I felt more confident/comfortable than in person601 (19.7)
Difficulties and challenges of telepsychiatry

I miss visiting the clinic/hospital and feeling connected to it936 (30.7)

I do not feel as connected to my doctor/nurse/therapist752 (24.6)

I am concerned that my doctor/nurse/therapist might miss something because they do not see me in person (eg, a side effect of the medicine)593 (19.4)

I do not feel as comfortable talking about my problems as I do in person471 (15.4)

I have had technical problems establishing/maintaining the connection375 (12.3)

I am concerned about confidentiality/privacy273 (8.9)

I do not feel that my doctor/nurse/therapist is as engaged in the conversation150 (4.9)

aPercentages represent the proportion of responders who endorsed a given option and are calculated in relation to the total number of respondents, since more than one positive element and/or challenge or difficulty could be selected. Responses are listed in order of most frequently endorsed items.

In the free-text comment section, patients generally found telepsychiatry to be safe and convenient, and expressed their gratitude to mental health care professionals for providing uninterrupted care during a very challenging time. Many suggested remote assessments should be maintained, mentioning that they feel more comfortable at home, can express themselves more freely, save transportation time and costs, and/or request less time off work. Others expressed feeling disengaged, feeling frustrated with technical difficulties and having a lack of resources to address them (eg, not owning a laptop or smartphone), difficulty finding a quiet setting (eg, children interrupting, shared housing), getting tests done or filling out forms.


Principal Findings

In this study, we report highly favorable attitudes toward telepsychiatry in its diverse forms, across a large sample of patients across the United States. To our knowledge, this is the largest evaluation of patient attitudes toward telepsychiatry to date, by at least an order of magnitude, which is timely in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic and the widespread stay-at-home and travel restriction orders, the duration of which is unclear.

Our results are aligned with other surveys very recently validated based on quality of care domains [24], showing high levels of satisfaction with telepsychiatry services. Other recent studies in older [25,26] and younger [27] adults showed similar results, all in smaller samples. Further, most of our respondents would like to continue using telepsychiatry. This finding is highly relevant given the diversity and size of our sample, drawn from a large network of community, real-world, and academic mental health centers, and should encourage allowing telepsychiatry to continue for some patient populations after the current pandemic is resolved. However, some respondents expressed a desire to resume usual in-person care as soon as possible and/or lean toward hybrid models. The option of telepsychiatry should remain tailored to individual patient needs and be the result of shared decision making.

Interestingly, subjects were more likely to strongly agree to consider using telepsychiatry in the future when using video. Concerns raised about lack of closeness and fear of a reduction in the doctor’s ability to detect subtle signs of body language, nonverbal cues, and/or physical signs of disease could be some of the reasons behind this preference [16]. Whereas the widespread use of the telephone may be the result of an abrupt transition related to COVID-19, access to technology may have been a potential barrier to the implementation of telepsychiatry that will need to be considered. Videoconferencing should be preferred over telephone whenever possible, particularly given the currently available technology, which allows for encrypted private communications [15]. Further, patients with sensory and/or cognitive limitations such as mutism, hearing difficulty, or visual or cognitive impairment would potentially require deployment of additional technologies and/or human resources.

Limitations

This study has some limitations. First, this study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated movement restrictions, which may have made hospital/doctor visits less appealing, adding safety as a confounder, possibly overestimating real user satisfaction. Second, our survey was short, the completion rate was relatively low, and our sample was not random, so selection, nonresponse, and response biases are possible [28]. Third, the influence of additional sociodemographic factors as well as symptom severity and/or previous telepsychiatry experience could not be ascertained. Longitudinal studies will be needed to assess impact on clinical outcomes and determine whether patients’ perceptions change over time.

Mental health professionals were already implementing digital technologies and advocating for more widespread use of telehealth [29], and the current scenario has accelerated its use. Thus, even after the COVID-19 pandemic ends, telepsychiatry is here to stay. However, patient concerns need to be heard and addressed, and positive experiences need to be acknowledged and echoed.

Conclusion

Patients had a generally positive attitude toward telepsychiatry and many would like to continue using it after the COVID-19 restrictions recede. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess whether patient perceptions change over time. However, some patients may benefit from continuous use of telepsychiatry. Results of this study should help shape policies regarding its use.

Acknowledgments

We thank the patients that took the time to participate in our study in such challenging times.

Conflicts of Interest

DG has been a consultant for and/or has received speaker honoraria from Otsuka America Pharmaceuticals and Janssen Pharmaceuticals. JMK has been a consultant and/or advisor for or has received honoraria from Alkermes, Allergan, LB Pharmaceuticals, H Lundbeck, Intracellular Therapies, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Minerva, Neurocrine, Newron, Otsuka, Pierre Fabre, Reviva, Roche, Sumitomo Dainippon, Sunovion, Takeda, Teva, and UpToDate and is a shareholder in LB Pharmaceuticals and Vanguard Research Group. PM has been a consultant to Otsuka and has received research funding from Alkermes, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Janssen, Lundbeck, NeuroRx, Otsuka, Takeda, and Roche. The other authors declare no conflicts.

Multimedia Appendix 1

Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES).

PDF File (Adobe PDF File), 64 KB

Multimedia Appendix 2

Telepsychiatry Patient Satisfaction Survey.

PDF File (Adobe PDF File), 67 KB

  1. Hilty DM, Ferrer DC, Parish MB, Johnston B, Callahan EJ, Yellowlees PM. The effectiveness of telemental health: a 2013 review. Telemed J E Health 2013 Jun;19(6):444-454 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  2. Hilty DM, Sunderji N, Suo S, Chan S, McCarron RM. Telepsychiatry and other technologies for integrated care: evidence base, best practice models and competencies. Int Rev Psychiatry 2018 Dec;30(6):292-309. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  3. Sunjaya AP, Chris A, Novianti D. Efficacy, patient-doctor relationship, costs and benefits of utilizing telepsychiatry for the management of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): a systematic review. Trends Psychiatry Psychother 2020 Mar;42(1):102-110 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  4. Salmoiraghi A, Hussain S. A Systematic Review of the Use of Telepsychiatry in Acute Settings. Journal of Psychiatric Practice 2015;21(5):389-393. [CrossRef]
  5. Shore JH, Savin D, Orton H, Beals J, Manson SM. Diagnostic reliability of telepsychiatry in American Indian veterans. Am J Psychiatry 2007 Jan;164(1):115-118. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  6. Seidel RW, Kilgus MD. Agreement between telepsychiatry assessment and face-to-face assessment for Emergency Department psychiatry patients. J Telemed Telecare 2014 Jan 10;20(2):59-62. [CrossRef]
  7. Johansson R, Björklund M, Hornborg C, Karlsson S, Hesser H, Ljótsson B, et al. Affect-focused psychodynamic psychotherapy for depression and anxiety through the Internet: a randomized controlled trial. PeerJ 2013;1:e102 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  8. Hubley S, Lynch SB, Schneck C, Thomas M, Shore J. Review of key telepsychiatry outcomes. World J Psychiatry 2016 Jun 22;6(2):269-282 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  9. Thomas JF, Novins DK, Hosokawa PW, Olson CA, Hunter D, Brent AS, et al. The Use of Telepsychiatry to Provide Cost-Efficient Care During Pediatric Mental Health Emergencies. Psychiatr Serv 2018 Feb 01;69(2):161-168. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  10. Richardson LK, Frueh BC, Grubaugh AL, Egede L, Elhai JD. Current Directions in Videoconferencing Tele-Mental Health Research. Clin Psychol (New York) 2009 Sep 01;16(3):323-338 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  11. Gentry MT, Lapid MI, Rummans TA. Geriatric Telepsychiatry: Systematic Review and Policy Considerations. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2019 Feb;27(2):109-127. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  12. Barnett ML, Ray KN, Souza J, Mehrotra A. Trends in Telemedicine Use in a Large Commercially Insured Population, 2005-2017. JAMA 2018 Nov 27;320(20):2147-2149 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  13. Thiele JS, Doarn CR, Shore JH. Locum tenens and telepsychiatry: trends in psychiatric care. Telemed J E Health 2015 Jun;21(6):510-513. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  14. Yellowlees P, Nafiz N. The psychiatrist-patient relationship of the future: anytime, anywhere? Harv Rev Psychiatry 2010;18(2):96-102. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  15. Guinart D, Marcy P, Hauser M, Dwyer M, Kane JM. Mental Healthcare Providers' Attitudes Towards Telepsychiatry: A Systemwide, Multisite Survey during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatr Serv 2020:1-21 [FREE Full text]
  16. Cowan KE, McKean AJ, Gentry MT, Hilty DM. Barriers to Use of Telepsychiatry: Clinicians as Gatekeepers. Mayo Clin Proc 2019 Dec;94(12):2510-2523. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  17. Hilty DM, Nesbitt TS, Kuenneth CA, Cruz GM, Hales RE. Rural versus suburban primary care needs, utilization, and satisfaction with telepsychiatric consultation. J Rural Health 2007 Mar;23(2):163-165. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  18. Schubert N, Backman P, Bhatla R, Corace K. Telepsychiatry and patient–provider concordance. Can J Rural Med 2019;24(3):75. [CrossRef]
  19. Kruse CS, Krowski N, Rodriguez B, Tran L, Vela J, Brooks M. Telehealth and patient satisfaction: a systematic review and narrative analysis. BMJ Open 2017 Aug 03;7(8):e016242 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  20. Ohannessian R, Duong TA, Odone A. Global Telemedicine Implementation and Integration Within Health Systems to Fight the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Call to Action. JMIR Public Health Surveill 2020 Apr 02;6(2):e18810 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  21. Smith K, Ostinelli E, Macdonald O, Cipriani A. COVID-19 and Telepsychiatry: Development of Evidence-Based Guidance for Clinicians. JMIR Ment Health 2020 Aug 28;7(8):e21108 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  22. Torous J, Jän Myrick K, Rauseo-Ricupero N, Firth J. Digital Mental Health and COVID-19: Using Technology Today to Accelerate the Curve on Access and Quality Tomorrow. JMIR Ment Health 2020 Mar 26;7(3):e18848 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  23. Eysenbach G. Improving the quality of Web surveys: the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES). J Med Internet Res 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  24. Serhal E, Kirvan A, Sanches M, Crawford A. Client Satisfaction and Experience With Telepsychiatry: Development and Validation of a Survey Using Clinical Quality Domains. J Med Internet Res 2020 Sep 29;22(9):e19198 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  25. Dham P, Gupta N, Alexander J, Black W, Rajji T, Skinner E. Community based telepsychiatry service for older adults residing in a rural and remote region- utilization pattern and satisfaction among stakeholders. BMC Psychiatry 2018 Sep 27;18(1):316 [FREE Full text] [CrossRef] [Medline]
  26. Hantke N, Lajoy M, Gould CE, Magwene EM, Sordahl J, Hirst R, et al. Patient Satisfaction With Geriatric Psychiatry Services via Video Teleconference. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2020 Apr;28(4):491-494. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  27. Mayworm AM, Lever N, Gloff N, Cox J, Willis K, Hoover SA. School-Based Telepsychiatry in an Urban Setting: Efficiency and Satisfaction with Care. Telemed J E Health 2020 Apr 01;26(4):446-454. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  28. Williams TL, May CR, Esmail A. Limitations of patient satisfaction studies in telehealthcare: a systematic review of the literature. Telemed J E Health 2001 Dec;7(4):293-316. [CrossRef] [Medline]
  29. Shore JH, Schneck CD, Mishkind MC. Telepsychiatry and the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic-Current and Future Outcomes of the Rapid Virtualization of Psychiatric Care. JAMA Psychiatry 2020 May 11. [CrossRef] [Medline]


CHERRIES: Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys


Edited by J Torous; submitted 04.10.20; peer-reviewed by D Hilty, N Hantke; comments to author 19.10.20; revised version received 30.11.20; accepted 01.12.20; published 22.12.20

Copyright

©Daniel Guinart, Patricia Marcy, Marta Hauser, Michael Dwyer, John M Kane. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (http://mental.jmir.org), 22.12.2020.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Mental Health, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mental.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.