Patients’ acceptance of video consultations in the mental health services: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research

Abstract

Background Clinical effectiveness of video consultations in the mental health services is comparable with in-person consultations. Acceptance has typically been rated in surveys that do not give a deeper understanding behind the phenomenon. The aim of this synthesis is to explore mental health patients’ perceptions of factors that influence their acceptance of video consultations viewed from the perspective of the patient. Methods A literature search in scientific databases was conducted. Peer-reviewed reports of qualitative research exploring patients’ experiences with video consultations from the patients’ perspectives were included. Then a meta-summary and a taxonomic analysis were conducted. Results A total of 11 reports met the inclusion criteria. Through the analysis, a model was generated with five factors that precede each other and interact with each other. Patients thought video consultations were acceptable when (1) they experienced barriers and inconvenience to accessing the location of services, (2) they had already established a trustful relationship with their therapist, (3) technical interferences were minor and problems were resolved quickly, (4) patients expected a less personal meeting, and (5) the degree of the patients’ issues were less complex. Discussion This model is intended to help clinicians identify circumstances where offering video consultations make best sense to patients and help sustain meaningful use prospectively. When patients encounter barriers to in-person services, clinicians should consider offering video consultations when the technology is adequately integrated in practice, and it is perceived not to intervene with treatment or the therapeutic process.

Factors that determine mental health professionals’ decision to support home-based video consultations – A qualitative study

“…However, therapists found that they needed to establish a relationship in person; nevertheless, they acknowledged that this was their personal need and they were uncertain of the patients’ needs, since those who only met via video seemed satisfied and at ease with the format. However, patients often express that they, too, prefer knowing the therapist before having a video consultation ( 9 ), and clinicians in other fields also prefer knowing their patients before switching to video ( 22 ). The relationship or therapeutic alliance is found to be determining for the clinical outcome ( 23 ), yet the clinical effect has been shown to be similar among consultations with physical presence and video consultations, but sometimes the alliance was better with physical presence than via video conferencing ( 5 ).…”

“…Moreover, evidence has established that the clinical effect of using homebased video consultations among different patient groups is similar to in-person consultations at clinics, satisfaction and acceptance are high, and the therapeutic alliance can be kept strong (4)(5)(6)(7)(8). Qualitative studies indicate that patients find video consultations acceptable when they experience barriers to in-person services and when it is perceived to not interfere with their treatment (9). Less is known about how to use video consultations in usual practice, the role of providers' voluntariness of use on their acceptance, and how social influence from leadership and contextual factors impact providers' attitudes (10).…”

Motor Resonance During Action Observation and Its Relevance to Virtual Clinical Consultations: Observational Study Using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

“…However, virtual clinical encounters do demand more explicit forms of verbal communication [ 21 ] along with sufficient use of nonverbal gestures [ 22 ] than face-to-face consultations to ensure sufficient social information sharing. Our findings that motor resonance was greater in real (than virtual) actions may partly explain such limitations of video-based consultations and encourage the use of these technologies in less complex or less sensitive clinical situations and where there is already a trustful doctor-patient relationship in place [ 23 ].…”

Scoping Review of Challenges and Existing Tools

“…26 Although patients and providers can see and talk to each other, the contact, in this context, is less personal. 30 Building a relationship, a form of proximity, at a distance, is more complex because patients and providers use their senses differently. 19 The physical cues they typically rely on during consultations, such as eye contact and body language, are more challenging to rely on during video consultations.…”