TABLE 2.

Relationship of high provider satisfaction ratings with patient and VV characteristics

Visit characteristic	n	High satisfaction† (n = 81) (n, %)	Low satisfaction (n = 13) (n, %)	OR	95% CI
Patient gender
Female	53	45 (85)	8 (15)	Reference
Male	41	36 (88)	5 (12)	1.28	0.39–4.25
Patient age (years)
<18	30	26 (87)	4 (13)	Reference
18–29	37	33 (89)	4 (11)	1.27	0.29–5.57
30+	27	22 (82)	5 (19)	0.68	0.16–2.84
Diagnostic category
Hematological malignancy	61	54 (89)	7 (12)	Reference
Solid tumor	29	25 (86)	4 (14)	0.81	0.22–3.02
Other	4	2 (50)	2 (50)	0.13	0.02–1.07
Week of visit
1–5	31	23 (28)	8 (62)	Reference
6‐7	27	23 (28)	4 (31)	2.00	0.53– 7.58
8–10	36	36 (44)	1 (8)	12.17	1.43– 103.93
Provider VV volume‡
Low (<10 VV)	20	11 (56)	9 (45)	Reference
High (20–30 VV)	74	70 (95)	4 (5)	14.32	3.76– 54.60
Risk for late effects
Low	29	26 (90)	3 (10)	Reference
Moderate	29	27 (93)	2 (7)	1.56	0.24–10.09
High	36	28 (78)	8 (22)	0.40	0.10–1.69
Met clinical care objectives (n = 93)
No	51	40 (78)	11 (22)	Reference
Yes	42	40 (95)	2 (5)	5.55	1.15– 26.41

Abbreviation: VV, virtual visit.

^†High satisfaction group includes all visits rated “completely” or “ very” satisfied.

^‡Four providers with <10 VV classified as low volume; three providers with >20–30 VV classified as high volume.

OR in bold are significant at p < .05.