ABSTRACT
Objective: SinceMarch 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed rapid integration of telemedicine services into clinical practice. Our primary aim was to assess patient satisfaction with telehealth care in Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS). Our secondary aim was to assess patient access to technology for telehealth visits. Methods: This was an IRB-approved, single-institution, survey study of a convenience sample of patients presenting for telehealth visits within the Division of FPMRS from July 22, 2020 to January 15, 2021. We invited new and established patients to complete a single survey regarding reason for visit, overall satisfaction, access to technology, previous use of telemedicine, and preference for future visits. We present data as mean ± standard deviation or proportion. Results: Of 227 patients offered the survey, 142 (62.6%) responded;84 (59.2%) completed the survey following a video visit, and 58 (40.9%) completed the survey following a telephone visit. Respondents had a mean age of 51.5 ± 15.4 years, and most were Non-Hispanic White (70.4%) and had at least a Bachelor's degree (64.8%). The most common primary diagnoses were sexual dysfunction (26.1%), overactive bladder (21.8%), and urinary incontinence (14.1%). Most patients in both the video and phone groups were completely satisfied (62.4% and 56.0%, respectively) or moderately satisfied (24.4% and 39.3%, respectively). Patient-reported advantages of telehealth included saving travel time (93.0%), waiting room time (59.2%), parking fees (50.0%), time off work (43.7%), and public transit fees (22.5%). Patients also reported greater overall convenience (60.6%) and feeling that they had more time with the provider (21.8%). Patient-cited disadvantages were concern about the provider's ability to make a diagnosis (69.0%) or see something of concern remotely (64.1%). Only 5.6% of patients expressed concern about difficulty building rapport with a provider virtually. Regarding access to telehealth visits, 8.5% cited a poor internet connection and 7.0% felt that setting up a virtual platform could be challenging. In anticipation of post-COVID FPMRS visits, most respondents (79.6%) preferred a combination of virtual and in-person visits. Only 2.1% indicated a preference for all future visits to be virtual, while 10.6% preferred only inperson visits, and 7.7% did not express a preference. Among respondents who preferred at least some virtual visits, 73.3% preferred video, whereas 25.9% preferred telephone visits. Conclusions: This study demonstrates high patient satisfaction with virtual telehealth visits at our FPMRS Division during the COVID-19 pandemic. Saving travel time and overall convenience were themost highly cited advantages of telehealth by patients. Patients prefer receiving a combination of telehealth and in-person visits post-pandemic. This study underscores an important role for telehealth in future FPMRS practice and should inform future studies to explore which conditions, visit types, and patient characteristics are best served by virtual versus in-person visits.