Telemedicine: Future of the healthcare system and its impact on patient satisfaction: A literature review

J Family Med Prim Care. 2024 Nov;13(11):4810-4814. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_830_24. Epub 2024 Nov 18.

Abstract

Background and objectives: The utilization of telemedicine has increased dramatically since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this review, we examined studies published within the past five years that investigated the impact of telemedicine on patient satisfaction.

Methods: Four investigators utilized PubMed and Google Scholar to find studies published within the past five years that assessed patient satisfaction with telemedicine in the field of adult primary care, using either the Press Ganey or CAHPS surveys. Studies that compared cost and quality of care between telemedicine and in-patient healthcare were also included to address the secondary aims of this study.

Results: A total of 11 studies out of the 405 that were investigated were selected for this review. Five studies found no significant difference in patient satisfaction between telemedicine and in-person medicine, with one of those showing a patient preference for telemedicine. One study demonstrated significantly higher satisfaction with in-person medicine vs. telemedicine. Another study found that most physicians and patients reported no perceived difference in quality of care between telemedicine and in-person visitation. One study found no difference in patient satisfaction with telemedicine between immigrants and non-immigrants. Another study showed that patients have higher satisfaction when using telemedicine with their PCP vs. an unfamiliar provider. Two studies found telemedicine to be cost-effective.

Conclusions: Our review concludes that patient satisfaction with telemedicine is not inferior to that with in-person visits. However, further research should be conducted to determine various factors that may affect patient perception and satisfaction.

Keywords: Patient satisfaction; telehealth; telemedicine.

Publication types

  • Review