Current status and factors influencing clinicians from different hospital levels and departments in remote patient management
10.3760/cma.j.cn112138-20250721-00424
- VernacularTitle:各级医院科室临床医生参与远程患者管理的现状及影响因素分析
- Author:
Yize ZHAO
1
;
Zhixian WANG
1
;
Wenyu WANG
1
;
Liu HE
1
;
Changsheng MA
1
Author Information
1. 首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院心脏内科中心，北京 100029
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Telemedicine;
Disease management;
Internet
- From:
Chinese Journal of Internal Medicine
2025;64(11):1102-1110
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To analyze the current status and factors influencing clinician participation in remote patient management in China.Methods:In December 2023, a structured electronic questionnaire was administered to 7 980 clinicians, including 930 cardiologists. The survey assessed clinicians′ participation in online doctor-patient interactions; differences in hospital support across city tiers, hospital grades, professional titles, and departments; and factors influencing the willingness of clinicians to invest time in remote patient management.Results:Among the 7 980 surveyed clinicians, online consultations had the highest participation rate (72.2%). Among cardiologists, participation rates for online consultations, health education, and post-consultation management were 73.3%, 66.9%, and 38.5%, respectively, which were relatively higher than those of other specialties. Hospital-based support for physicians in remote patient management showed significant variations across specialties and regions. Among cardiologists, 68.4% received "encouraging" policies, with the majority falling under "encouragement without incentive policies" (42.6%). In tier 3 cities, the proportion of physicians receiving "encouragement without incentive policies" was the highest (47.9%), while the proportion in the "cautious, requiring reporting" category was the lowest (3.9%). During remote patient management, the proportions of clinicians receiving support from professional teams were highest among those in tier 3 cities (29.6%) and cardiologists (30.5%). A significant interaction effect was observed between hospital policy and specialty (cardiologists vs. all clinicians) regarding physicians′ willingness to invest time in remote patient management ( F=5.95, P<0.001). Among cardiologists, those working in institutions with "encouraging, with incentives" policies reported a significantly longer median weekly investment time (10.0 h) compared to those under "neutral, unrestricted" policies (7.0 h, P<0.001). Cardiologists with team support reported a significant increase in the time they were willing to invest (10 h/week) than those without team support (7.0 h/week, P<0.001), although no significant interaction effect was found when compared with all clinicians ( P=0.186). Cardiologists with a high online income (>5 000 Yuan/month) reported a significantly longer weekly investment time in remote management (25.0 h) compared to those with lower income (<200 yuan/month; 8.0 h, P<0.001). However, whether the income met their personal expectations had no significant effect on their time commitment ( P=0.638). Conclusions:Clinicians from tertiary hospitals and tier 3 cities demonstrated a higher level of engagement in remote patient management. Strengthening hospital policy support, enhancing team-based collaborations, and increasing online income levels may help promote the broader adoption of telemedicine.
