Survey of Clinician Experiences of Telepsychiatry and Tele-Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic created pressure to implement telepsychiatry across practice models.

Objective: We sought to evaluate the overall success of this change and to identify what types of practice settings, provider groups, and patient groups were best served by telepsychiatry and telepsychotherapy utilization. We were particularly interested in how providers of consultation-liaison psychiatry adapted to remote care.

Methods: An anonymous provider survey querying demographics, education, training, technological experience, practice setting, treatment modalities, patient groups, transition process, and outcomes was made openly available via social media and professional listservs. We used multivariable regression modeling to evaluate for predictors of the positive outcomes of overall satisfaction, subjective ability to diagnose and treat patients adequately using exclusively telepsychiatric platforms, and patient satisfaction by proxy.

Results: Three hundred thirty-three respondents, mostly young (59.4% younger than 50 years), female (69.7%), and physicians (67.9%), completed the survey. One hundred ninety-seven (59.1%) worked in consultation-liaison psychiatry. Of the total, 85.9% gave affirmative answers to overall satisfaction. Multivariable linear regression models found that satisfaction was predicted by general comfort with technology (P < 0.001), but negatively correlated with having technical issues (P < 0.001), a priori skepticism (P < 0.001), clinician being male (P = 0.004), and treating LGBTQ+ patients (P = 0.022). Completeness was associated with having training in telehealth (P = 0.039) and general comfort with technology (P < 0.001) but negatively associated with treating LGBTQ+ patients (P = 0.024) or inpatients (P = 0.002). Patient satisfaction by proxy was positively associated with general comfort with technology (P < 0.001) and the respondent being a nonphysician (P = 0.004) and negatively associated with encountering a technical issue (P = 0.013) or treating inpatients (P = 0.045). Consultation-liaison psychiatrists had similar results overall and were more likely to have other staff assist in making televisits effective (mean [standard deviation]: -1.25 [3.57] versus -2.76 [3.27], P < 0.001) especially if consultative (mean [standard deviation]: -0.87 [3.67] versus -2.39 [3.01], P = 0.010).

Conclusions: This study suggests high rates of overall satisfaction in telepsychiatry adoption, even in consultation-liaison psychiatry. There is distinct benefit in bolstering training, providing technical support, and addressing skepticism. Future research should include patient surveys and control groups and should focus on vulnerable populations such as sexual and gender minorities.