Skip to main content
PMC home page
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
letter
. 2021 Apr 1;59:102641. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2021.102641

Telepsychiatry versus face to face consultation in COVID-19 Era from the patients’ perspective

Mohammad Gamal Sehlo 1,*, Usama Mahmoud Youssef 1, Mohammad Ibrahim Elshami 2, Dina Sameh Elrafey 3, Hayam Mohammed Elgohari 4
PMCID: PMC8015378  PMID: 33838435

1. Introduction

Telepsychiatry is a branch of telemedicine, Many published reviews have reported that telepsychiatry is comparable to face to face communications (Gajaria et al., 2015, Schutte et al., 2015, Hubley et al., 2016; Mazhari et al., 2019). However, it appears less reliable in the assessment of symptoms, such as emotional affect, that require visual observation of behavior (Jones et al., 2001), so, the efficacy of telepsychiatry to provide clinical psychiatric services to remote communities has yet to be definitively established (Tang et al., 2020).

Nowadays with the development of COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown has become a must, which made the conventional psychiatric consultations difficult. This makes telepsychiatry a highly important method for patient’s care during the pandemic.

The objective of this study was to compare the differences between face to face consultation and telepsychiatry from the patients’ perspective among an Egyptian sample of psychiatric patients during COVID-19 pandemic.

2. Methods

2.1. Study design and participants

This study was a cross sectional study that included183 psychiatric patients. An online survey was conducted at June, 2020, it was designed by the authors and uploaded using Google forms in a specific web site (www.shezlong.com) that gives a telepsychiatry service. The patients were invited to complete the designed questionnaire including socio-demographic data and questions that compare between face to face consultations and telepsychiatry from the patients’ perspective (in a complete privacy) with a question at the beginning of the survey “Do you agree to participate in this study?” as a written consent. Inclusion criteria of the study were psychiatric patients of an age at least 18 years and less than 60 and both sexes. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Research Review Board (IRB) of the faculty of medicine, Zagazig University, Egypt, according to the ethical guidelines outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments. IRB number 6509.

3. Results

47.5 % of patients had a general satisfaction towards face to face consultation versus 21.8 % towards telepsychiatry and 30.6 % towards both. 49.2 % of patients reported that the cost is better in face to face consultation versus 22.9 % in telepsychiatry and 27.9 % reported it is equal in both. 55.2 % of patients trust the face to face diagnosis versus 4.4 % trust telepsychiatry and 40.4 % trusted both equally .46.5 % of patients trust the treatment in face to face consultation versus 2.7 % for telepsychiatry and 50.8 % for both. 34.4 % of patients reported that telling symptoms is easy and free during face to face consultation versus 29.5 % for telepsychiatry and 36.1 % reported that both are equal. 45.9 % of patients feel doctor care and patience during face to face consultation versus 5.5 % during telepsychiatry and 48.6 % during both. 27.3 % of patients told that their concentration is better during face to face consultation versus 21.8 % during telepsychiatry and 50.8 % during both. 33.3 % of patients feel doctor concentration during face to face consultation versus 6.6 % during telepsychiatry and 60.1 % during both. 34.4 % of patients feel security and privacy during face to face consultation versus 18.6 % during telepsychiatry and 47 % during both (Table 1 ).

Table 1.

Patient opinion about the differences between online and face to face consultation.

Variable (n = 183)
N %
Patient’s Satisfaction Both equal 56 30.6
Online more than face to face 40 21.8
Face to face more than online 87 47.5
Cost Both equal 51 27.9
Online more than face to face 42 22.9
Face to face more than online 90 49.2
Trust diagnosis Both equal 74 40.4
Online more than face to face 8 4.4
Face to face more than online 101 55.2
Trust treatment Both equal 93 50.8
Online more than face to face 5 2.7
Face to face more than online 85 46.5
Telling symptoms easily Both equal 66 36.1
Online more than face to face 54 29.5
Face to face more than online 63 34.4
Doctor care Both equal 89 48.6
Online more than face to face 10 5.5
Face to face more than online 84 45.9
Patient concentration Both equal 93 50.8
Online more than face to face 40 21.8
Face to face more than online 50 27.3
Doctor concentration Both equal 110 60.1
Online more than face to face 12 6.6
Face to face more than online 61 33.3
Feeling of security and privacy Both equal 86 47.0
Online more than face to face 34 18.6
Face to face more than online 63 34.4
Online advantages Avoiding embarrassment and stigma attached to psychological clinics. 88 57.5
Avoiding COVID-19 infection 108 59.1
Saving money for travelling and transportation 87 47.5
Saving time for travelling, transportation and waiting at the clinic. 129 70.5
Face to face advantages Taking a handwritten prescription 53 29
Feeling of more security associated with the privacy of personal information. 76 41.5
Feeling that the doctor can diagnose accurately 102 55.7
Feeling direct contact between the doctor and the patient 154 84.2
After the end of COVID-19 pandemic you will prefer Both of them 45 24.6
Online 42 23
Face to face in clinic 96 52.4
Open in a new tab

The major advantages of online consultations were avoiding embarrassment and stigma attached to psychiatric clinic, avoiding COVID-19 infection, saving money for travelling and transportation and saving time for travelling, transportation and waiting at the clinic. The major advantages of face to face consultations were taking a handwritten prescription, feeling of more security associated with the privacy of personal information, feeling that the doctor can diagnose accurately and feeling direct contact between the doctor and the patient (Table 1).

52.4 % of the patients prefer face to face consultation versus only 23 % who prefer online consultation as a method for communication after the end of COVID-19 pandemic (Table 1).

4. Discussion

In the present study, the patients’ satisfaction with face to face consultation was significantly higher than online consultation. Although a large number of studies have reported the positive views of patients about telepsychiatry, Patients generally report increasing satisfaction with telepsychiatry after a period of initial fear and discomfort (Whitten and Mackert, 2005; Shore et al., 2008; Gibson et al., 2011, Miller et al., 2016, Salomone, and Maurizio 2017; Myers et al., 2017), the situation in Egypt may be different as the role model for a good doctor patient relationship and rapport from the patients’ perspective is to see the doctor and speak with him face to face. Also lack of patients’ awareness and acceptance of receiving healthcare through telemedicine services, is one of the big challenges that face the telemedicine projects in Egypt (Hussein and Khalifa, 2012), many studies reported that the most frequent barrier using telepsychiatry, was the difficulty to establish rapport (Wagnild et al., 2006; Shore et al., 2012, 2013).

An important findings were that, most of the patients in our study were worried about the privacy of the informations when using online consultation and 52.4 % of the patients prefer to continue on face to face consultation after the end of Covid-19 pandemic versus 23 % prefer online consultation. Many studies reported that clinicians and patients have concerns about protecting the patient’s privacy when using telepsychiatry (Myers et al., 2001; Parish et al., 2017). The patients were not reassured that no one was listening, watching, or recording the session (Brooks et al., 2013).

In conclusion, Telepsychiatry is an important method for evaluation and follow up of the psychiatric patients especially in pandemics, so developing new training programs in Egypt to increase the awareness about the importance of telepsychiatry for both the clinicians and the patients through workshops, symposia and conferences are highly important to raise the satisfaction, credibility and trust of the online consultation from the patients’ perspective.

Funding

None.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors report no declarations of interest.

Acknowledgment

None.

References

  1. Brooks E., Turvey C., Augusterfer E.F. Provider barriers to telemental health: obstacles overcome, obstacles remaining. Telemed. J. E Health. 2013;19(6):433–437. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2013.0068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Gajaria A., Conn D., Madan R. Telepsychiatry: effectiveness and feasibility. Smart Homecare Technol. TeleHealth. 2015;11(3):59–67. doi: 10.2147/SHTT.S45702. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Gibson K., O’Donnell S., Coulson H., Kakepetum-Schultz T. Mental health professionals’ perspectives of telemental health with remote and rural First Nations communities. J. Telemed. Telecare. 2011;17(5):263–267. doi: 10.1258/jtt.2011.101011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Hubley S., Lynch S.B., Schneck C., Thomas M., Shore J. Review of key telepsychiatry outcomes. World J. Psychiatry. 2016;6(2):269–282. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v6.i2.269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Hussein R., Khalifa A. Telemedicine in Egypt: SWOT analysis and future trends. GMS Medizinische Informatik. GMS Medizinische Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie. 2012;8(1):1–16. doi: 10.3205/mibe000125. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Jones B.N., Johnston D., Reboussin B., McCall W.V. Reliability of telepsychiatry assessments: subjective versus observational ratings. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry Neurol. 2001;14(2):66–71. doi: 10.1177/089198870101400204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Mazhari S., Nejad A.G., Mofakhami O., Raaii F., Bahaadinbeigy K. Evaluating the diagnostic agreement between telepsychiatry assessment and face-to-face visit: a preliminary study. Iran. J. Psychiatry. 2019;14(3):236–241. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Miller C.J., McInnes D.K., Stolzmann K., Bauer M.S. Interest in use of technology for healthcare among veterans receiving treatment for mental health. Telemed. J. E Health. 2016;22(10):847–854. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2015.0190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Myers K., Valentine J., Morganthaler R., Melzer S. Telepsychiatry with incarcerated youth. J. Adolesc. Health. 2001;38(6):643–648. doi: 10.1016/j. 2006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Myers K., Nelson E.L., Rabinowitz T., Hilty D., Baker D., Barnwell S.S., Boyce G., Bufka L.F., Cain S., Chui L., Comer J.S., Cradock C., Goldstein F., Johnston B., Krupinski E., Bernard J. American Telemedicine Association Practice guidelines for telemental healthwith children and adolescents. Telemed. J. E Health. 2017;23(10):779–804. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2017.0177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Parish M.B., Fazio S., Chan S., Yellowlees P.M. Managing psychiatrist-patient relationships in the digital age: a summary review of the impact of technology-enabled care on clinical processes and rapport. Curr. Psychiatry Rep. 2017;19(11):90. doi: 10.1007/s11920-017-0839-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Salomone E., Maurizio A.G. Parental attitudes to a telehealth parent coaching intervention for autism spectrum disorder. J. Telemed. Telecare. 2017;23(3):416–420. doi: 10.1177/1357633X16642067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Schutte J.l., McCue M.P., Parmanto B., McGonigle J., Handen B., Lewis A., Pulantara I.W., Saptono A. Usability and reliability of a remotely administered adult autism assessment,the autism diagnostic observation schedule (ADOS) module 4. Telemed. J. E Health. 2015;21(3):176–184. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2014.0011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Shore J.H. Telepsychiatry: videoconferencing in the delivery of psychiatric care. Am. J. Psychiatry. 2013;170(3):256–262. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Shore J.H., Brooks E., Savin D., Orton H., Grigsby J., Manson S.M. Acceptability of telepsychiatry in american Indians. Telemed. J. E Health. 2008;14(5):461–466. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2007.0077. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Shore J.H., Brooks E., Anderson H., Bair B., Dailey N., Kaufmann L.J., Manson S. Characteristics of telemental health service use by American Indian veterans. Psychiatr. Serv. 2012;63(2):179–181. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201100098. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Tang J.W., Tambyah P.A., Hui D.S. Emergence of a novel coronavirus causing respiratory illness from Wuhan, China. J. Infect. 2020;80(3):350–371. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.01.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wagnild G., Leenknecht C., Zauher J. Psychiatrists’ satisfaction with telepsychiatry. Telemed. J. E Health. 2006;12(5):546–551. doi: 10.1089/tmj. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Whitten P.S., Mackert M.S. Addressing telehealth’s foremost barrier: provider as initial gatekeeper. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care. 2005;21(4):517–521. doi: 10.1017/S0266462305050725. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Asian Journal of Psychiatry are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES