Table 4.

Joint Display of Converging Quantitative and Qualitative Findings

	QUANTITATIVE	QUALITATIVE
Overall Telehealth Access and Use	Approximately three-fourths of participants engaged in any telehealth and half of participants in an HIV video or telephone visit after the COVID-19 pandemic began	A range of telehealth access challenges include no or unstable: - Devices - WiFi connectivity - User unfriendly telehealth App (specific to AMC)
	Approximately half of participants reported having difficulty with technology	Participants reported lacking competency (‘savvy’) with technology and/or telehealth
	For HIV visits, 60% by video and 40% by telephone	Common for video to ‘default to phone’ during the visit
		Participants mobilized to overcome challenges with access and use, inconsistently resulting in a visit
		Concerns about technology/telehealth privacy
Differences in Telehealth Use by Significant Characteristics	Location of Service: FQHC more likely to have HIV telehealth visit (and more likely to have any telehealth visit) than at the AMC	FQHC use of single sign-on system to log into a telehealth visit much simpler compared to AMC multi-step log-in and connection within ‘My Chart’ App
	Mental Health or Substance Use Diagnosis: Participants with mental health or substance use diagnoses more likely to have any telehealth visit compared to no diagnosis.	Telehealth favors ‘talk’ over physical diagnostic and care elements, which may have allowed for maintenance of therapy visits; however, see ‘influences upon ‘worse’ for caveats
Overall HIV Telehealth Quality	70% of participants reported that telehealth was ‘worse’ than in-person visits	Reasons for rating telehealth as ‘worse’: Less time with provider, increased forgetfulness, limited interpersonal physical interactions shaping quality including outcomes, altered communication, self-censoring Technology challenges worsened the visit when it occurred Ineffective outcomes defined as: no follow-up, referral error, generally ‘useless’ exchange
	30% reported telehealth was same/better than in-person visits	Reasons for rating telehealth as ‘same/better’: more efficient transport to visit, less waiting, ‘same result’ [e.g., effective]
		Reporting ‘worse’ quality did not mean unacceptable visit when recounting details if relationship established, health status stable, and outcomes are ‘same result’
Differences in Reported Telehealth Quality by Significant Characteristics	Education: Participants with fewer years of formal education more likely to report worse quality	See Reasons related to a worse telehealth visit; intensified combination of technology challenges and loss of interpersonal communication and interactions
	Language of Survey: All Spanish language participants reported worse quality (N = 7)	See Reasons related to a worse telehealth visit; less time and in-person physical exchange may negatively impact care with language-discordant providers