Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Nov 7, 2019
Date Accepted: Feb 7, 2020

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Revisiting Effective Communication Between Patients and Physicians: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Comparing Text-Based Electronic Versus Face-to-Face Communication

Mirzaei T, Kashian N

Revisiting Effective Communication Between Patients and Physicians: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Comparing Text-Based Electronic Versus Face-to-Face Communication

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(5):e16965

DOI: 10.2196/16965

PMID: 32401213

PMCID: 7254277

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Revisiting Effective Communication between Patients and Physicians: Text-based IT-Mediated versus Face-to-Face

  • Tala Mirzaei; 
  • Nicole Kashian

ABSTRACT

Background:

Research has shown that text-based communication via telemedicine will continue to be the primary mode of communication that patients and physicians use in the future. However, very few studies have examined patients’ perspectives regarding the increased use of text-based versus face-to-face (FtF) communication.

Objective:

The objective of our study is to understand and compare the potential differences in patients’ perceptions of communication effectiveness with their physicians through different modes of communication.

Methods:

We conducted an online national survey of 345 patients to explore the impact of different channels on effective communication and perceived health behavior and outcomes. We tested the impact of patients’ perceived communication and media effectiveness on their self-efficacy, communication satisfaction and perceived health outcomes, separately for text-based IT-mediated communication and FtF communication. Further we conducted a group comparison to identify significant differences across the two groups.

Results:

We found no significant differences between patients’ perceptions of effective communication using either IT-mediated versus FtF communication. However, We found significant differences in perceived media effectiveness: patients perceived FtF communication to be a more favorable medium. Interestingly we found no significant difference in terms of benefits and success of IT-mediated communication versus FtF.

Conclusions:

The results imply that patients can achieve the same level of communication effectiveness with their physicians using IT-mediated communication as they would in comparable FtF interactions, but patients view FtF communication to be a more favorable medium than IT-mediated communication. Clinical Trial: This study does not include a clinical trial. The Social and Behavioral Institutional Review Board of Florida International University has approved your study for the use of human subjects via the Expedited Review process. IRB Protocol Approval #: IRB-17-0203


 Citation

Please cite as:

Mirzaei T, Kashian N

Revisiting Effective Communication Between Patients and Physicians: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study Comparing Text-Based Electronic Versus Face-to-Face Communication

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(5):e16965

DOI: 10.2196/16965

PMID: 32401213

PMCID: 7254277

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.