Keywords: Digital visit, frontal visit, primary care

Background:

The integration of digital technologies into healthcare—particularly telemedicine—has accelerated rapidly, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Virtual consultations offer improved access, convenience, and reduced hospitalizations. However, concerns persist regarding their potential impact on the doctor–patient relationship and overall healthcare utilization. Understanding patient preferences in hindsight may help tailor future service delivery

Research questions:

To evaluate whether patients who attended in-person primary care visits would retrospectively have chosen a different mode of consultation, and to identify factors associated with their preferences

Method:

In this cross-sectional study, patients attending a primary care clinic completed pre- and post-visit questionnaires assessing visit preferences, technological literacy, and attitudes toward digital health. Physicians rated the suitability of each encounter for various consultation formats (in-person, telephone, or video)

Results:

Ninety patients completed the study (response rate: 90.91%), with a mean age of 63.5 ± 16.8 years; 52.2% were female. Older age groups (70–79 and 80+) significantly preferred in-person visits (p < 0.05), while gender was not associated with visit preference. Patient and physician assessments were significantly aligned in favor of in-person visits. Interestingly, technological literacy did not correlate with visit preference. However, patients with high technological literacy were more likely to report high self-efficacy (63% vs. 31%, p = 0.021) and perceived digital tools as easier to use (63% vs. 26%, p = 0.023)

Conclusions:

While older adults continue to favor traditional consultations, many patients with high digital literacy still opt for in-person care. Retrospective insights into patient preferences can inform hybrid care models, enabling personalization of healthcare delivery based on age, digital competency, and patient values

Points for discussion: