Reliability associated with the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) adapted for the telemedicine context.

OBJECTIVE This study's purpose was to adapt the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) for telemedicine clinics and to investigate the adapted measure's reliability. The study also sought to better understand the volume of technology-related utterance in established telemedicine clinics and the feasibility of using the measure within the telemedicine setting. This initial evaluation is a first step before broadly using the adapted measure across technologies and raters. METHODS An expert panel adapted the RIAS for the telemedicine context. This involved accounting for all consultation participants (patient, provider, presenter, family) and adding technology-specific subcategories. Ten new and 36 follow-up telemedicine encounters were videotaped and double coded using the adapted RIAS. These consisted primarily of follow-up visits (78.0%) involving patients, providers, presenters, and other parties. Reliability was calculated for those categories with 15 or more utterances. RESULTS Traditional RIAS categories related to socioemotional and task-focused clusters had fair to excellent levels of reliability in the telemedicine setting. Although there were too few utterances to calculate the reliability of the specific technology-related subcategories, the summary technology-related category proved reliable for patients, providers, and presenters. Overall patterns seen in traditional patient-provider interactions were observed, with the number of provider utterances far exceeding patient, presenter, and family utterances, and few technology-specific utterances. CONCLUSION The traditional RIAS is reliable when applied across multiple participants in the telemedicine context. Reliability of technology-related subcategories could not be evaluated; however, the aggregate technology-related cluster was found to be reliable and may be especially relevant in understanding communication patterns with patients new to the telemedicine setting. Use of the RIAS instrument is encouraged to facilitate comparison between traditional, face-to-face clinics and telemedicine; among diverse consultation mediums and technologies; and across different specialties. Future research is necessary to further investigate the reliability and validity of adding technology-related subcategories to the RIAS. The limited number of technology-related utterances, however, implies a certain degree of comfort with two-way interactive video consultation among study participants. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS Telemedicine continues to increase access to healthcare. The technology-related categories of the adapted RIAS were reliable when aggregated, thereby providing a tool to better understand how telemedicine affects provider-patient communication and outcomes.

[1]  D. Roter,et al.  Electronic medical record use and physician-patient communication: an observational study of Israeli primary care encounters. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[2]  C. May,et al.  Limitations of patient satisfaction studies in telehealthcare: a systematic review of the literature. , 2001, Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[3]  D. Roter,et al.  The Roter interaction analysis system (RIAS): utility and flexibility for analysis of medical interactions. , 2002, Patient education and counseling.

[4]  W. Hersh,et al.  Telemedicine for the medicare population: update. , 2006, Evidence report/technology assessment.

[5]  T. Utsugi,et al.  Doctor-patient communication: a comparison between telemedicine consultation and face-to-face consultation. , 2007, Internal medicine.

[6]  Judith A. Hall,et al.  Studies of doctor-patient interaction. , 1989, Annual review of public health.

[7]  J. Fleiss The design and analysis of clinical experiments , 1987 .

[8]  Elizabeth Murray,et al.  A qualitative study of communication during joint teleconsultations at the primary-secondary care interface , 2006, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[9]  M Withers,et al.  Use of videophones and low-cost standard telephone lines to provide a social presence in telepsychiatry. , 1998, Telemedicine journal : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[10]  George Demiris,et al.  A comparison of communication models of traditional and video-mediated health care delivery , 2005, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[11]  Jonathan Matusitz,et al.  Telemedicine: Its Effects on Health Communication , 2007, Health communication.

[12]  B. Wakefield,et al.  Nurse and patient communication profiles in a home-based telehealth intervention for heart failure management. , 2008, Patient education and counseling.

[13]  P. Whitten,et al.  Patient and provider satisfaction with the use of telemedicine: overview and rationale for cautious enthusiasm. , 2005, Journal of postgraduate medicine.

[14]  E. Miller,et al.  Solving the disjuncture between research and practice: telehealth trends in the 21st century. , 2007, Health policy.

[15]  J. Bensing,et al.  The Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) in oncological consultations:: psychometric properties , 1998, Psycho-oncology.

[16]  J P Watson,et al.  A Comparison of Communication Modes in Adult Psychiatry , 1995, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[17]  E. Miller,et al.  Modifying the Roter Interaction Analysis System to study provider-patient communication in telemedicine: promises, pitfalls, insights, and recommendations. , 2005, Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[18]  E. Miller,et al.  The technical and interpersonal aspects of telemedicine: effects on doctor–patient communication , 2003, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[19]  E. Miller,et al.  Telemedicine and doctor–patient communication: a theoretical framework for evaluation , 2002, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[20]  Stefan Sävenstedt,et al.  Nurse–doctor interaction in teleconsultations between a hospital and a geriatric nursing home , 2002, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[21]  Stuart Speedie,et al.  Communication patterns and technical quality of virtual visits in home care , 2003, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[22]  J. de Haes,et al.  Doctor-patient communication: a review of the literature. , 1995, Social science & medicine.

[23]  H White,et al.  A randomized, controlled trial of child psychiatric assessments conducted using videoconferencing , 2000, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[24]  P. Whitten,et al.  Systematic review of studies of patient satisfaction with telemedicine , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  Judith A. Hall,et al.  Doctors Talking With Patients/Patients Talking With Doctors: Improving Communication in Medical Visits , 1992 .

[26]  R. Street,et al.  Specialist–Primary Care Provider–Patient Communication in Telemedical Consultations , 2000 .

[27]  E. Miller,et al.  Telemedicine and doctor-patient communication: an analytical survey of the literature , 2001, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[28]  Rakhi Rajani,et al.  Social presence in telemedicine , 2002, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.