Bardia Amanirad BSc , Chinmay M. Potdar MSc , Matthew Ramotar H.BSc, Anna T. Santiago MSc, Janet Papadakos PhD, Med , David B. Shultz MD, PhD
{"title":"Patient Perspectives on Virtual vs In-Person Posttreatment Care for Brain Metastases","authors":"Bardia Amanirad BSc , Chinmay M. Potdar MSc , Matthew Ramotar H.BSc, Anna T. Santiago MSc, Janet Papadakos PhD, Med , David B. Shultz MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.adro.2025.101907","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>This study aims to explore perspectives of patients with brain metastasis on posttreatment care, comparing virtual and in-person visits, and identifying factors shaping those views.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>A cross-sectional survey assessed patient perspectives on posttreatment care. We offered the survey to English-fluent patients with internet access who received posttreatment care at a Brain Metastases Clinic (n = =140). One hundred twenty-three participants returned the survey, and 112 completed at least 80% of it, a criterion for inclusion. Patients received posttreatment follow-up care either virtually, in-person, or both. Nonparametric data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-Square tests, with a modified linear regression model evaluating factors related to visit satisfaction. Our hypothesis was that virtual care would be rated higher based on doctor punctuality, but lower on personal connection, communication, and overall satisfaction.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Participants who experienced both visit types rated in-person visits higher for personal connection (χ²(df = 1) = 19.703, <em>P</em> < .0001), ability to demonstrate physical problems (χ²(df = 1) = 18.778, <em>P</em> < .0001), and confidence in addressing health concerns (χ²(df = 1) = 16.941, <em>P</em> < .0001). Overall satisfaction did not significantly differ between visit types (U = 3607.5, z = 1.613, <em>P</em> = .107). Doctor punctuality (<em>t</em> = –2.328, SE = 0.32, <em>P</em> = .025) and communication effectiveness (<em>t</em> = –3.166, SE = 0.608, <em>P</em> = .003) were significant correlates to visit satisfaction.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Similar levels of satisfaction with virtual and in-person visits suggest that virtual care is a viable alternative to in-person visits. Higher ratings of personal connection felt with the physician, ability to demonstrate physical problems, and having health concerns properly addressed, within in-person visits, underscore their importance within a health care setting. Additionally, a doctor punctuality and communication skills are the most significant factors affecting visit satisfaction in this population, highlighting key areas for improvement in health care delivery.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7390,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","volume":"10 12","pages":"Article 101907"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109425001940","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
This study aims to explore perspectives of patients with brain metastasis on posttreatment care, comparing virtual and in-person visits, and identifying factors shaping those views.
Methods and Materials
A cross-sectional survey assessed patient perspectives on posttreatment care. We offered the survey to English-fluent patients with internet access who received posttreatment care at a Brain Metastases Clinic (n = =140). One hundred twenty-three participants returned the survey, and 112 completed at least 80% of it, a criterion for inclusion. Patients received posttreatment follow-up care either virtually, in-person, or both. Nonparametric data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and Chi-Square tests, with a modified linear regression model evaluating factors related to visit satisfaction. Our hypothesis was that virtual care would be rated higher based on doctor punctuality, but lower on personal connection, communication, and overall satisfaction.
Results
Participants who experienced both visit types rated in-person visits higher for personal connection (χ²(df = 1) = 19.703, P < .0001), ability to demonstrate physical problems (χ²(df = 1) = 18.778, P < .0001), and confidence in addressing health concerns (χ²(df = 1) = 16.941, P < .0001). Overall satisfaction did not significantly differ between visit types (U = 3607.5, z = 1.613, P = .107). Doctor punctuality (t = –2.328, SE = 0.32, P = .025) and communication effectiveness (t = –3.166, SE = 0.608, P = .003) were significant correlates to visit satisfaction.
Conclusions
Similar levels of satisfaction with virtual and in-person visits suggest that virtual care is a viable alternative to in-person visits. Higher ratings of personal connection felt with the physician, ability to demonstrate physical problems, and having health concerns properly addressed, within in-person visits, underscore their importance within a health care setting. Additionally, a doctor punctuality and communication skills are the most significant factors affecting visit satisfaction in this population, highlighting key areas for improvement in health care delivery.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of Advances is to provide information for clinicians who use radiation therapy by publishing: Clinical trial reports and reanalyses. Basic science original reports. Manuscripts examining health services research, comparative and cost effectiveness research, and systematic reviews. Case reports documenting unusual problems and solutions. High quality multi and single institutional series, as well as other novel retrospective hypothesis generating series. Timely critical reviews on important topics in radiation oncology, such as side effects. Articles reporting the natural history of disease and patterns of failure, particularly as they relate to treatment volume delineation. Articles on safety and quality in radiation therapy. Essays on clinical experience. Articles on practice transformation in radiation oncology, in particular: Aspects of health policy that may impact the future practice of radiation oncology. How information technology, such as data analytics and systems innovations, will change radiation oncology practice. Articles on imaging as they relate to radiation therapy treatment.