Journal of General Internal Medicine

, Volume 11, Issue 11, pp 678–683

Physician attitudes regarding telephone medicine

  • Mark D. Hannis
  • Ruth L Hazard
  • Marylee Rothschild
  • D. Michael Elnicki
  • Thomas C. Keyserling
  • Robert F. DeVellis
  • the TELI Group
Original Articles


OBJECTIVE: To measure physicians’ attitudes regarding telephone medicine and identify determinants of these attitudes.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING: Ten internal medicine residency programs in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS: Graduates from 1988 through 1992. The response rate was 62% (n=356).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Survey items were assigned to one of four types of variables: demographic, attitude, training, or system variables. We used factor analysis to consolidate information from the individual questions about attitudes. Six scales describing attitudes toward telephone medicine were identified. Cronbach’s α was greater than 0.70 for all scales. One scale measured physicians’ satisfaction and confidence with the management of patient calls. Other attitude scales measured the helpfulness of personal experience or informal education and the importance of formal training in telephone medicine. Three of the scales measured how comfortable the physician felt prescribing over the telephone. We used regression analysis to predict physician attitudes towards telephone medicine using the demographic, training, and system variables. Availability of the patient’s chart, feeling prepared for telephone medicine by one’s residency training, and being comfortable prescribing narcotics by telephone predicted satisfaction and confidence with the management of patient calls (R2=.25).

CONCLUSIONS: Several physician attitudes regarding telephone medicine can be measured reliably. Our findings suggest that improving systems for managing patient calls and improving telephone training for physicians will improve physician satisfaction and confidence with the practice of telephone medicine.

Key words

physician attitudes telephone medical education survey scales 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Medical Practice in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation; 1981.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Radecki S, Neville R, Girard R. Telephone patient management by primary care physicians. Med Care. 1989;27(8):817–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Johnson B, Johnson C. Telephone medicine: a general internal medicine experience. J Gen Intern Med. 1990;5:234–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greenlick M, Freeborn D, Gambill G, Pope C. Determinants of medical care utilization: the role of the telephone in total medical care. Med Care. 1973;11(2):121–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bertera E, Bertera R. The cost-effectiveness of telephone vs clinic counseling for hypertensive patients. Am J Public Health. 1981;71:626–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Infante-Rivard C, Krieger M, Petitclerc M, Baumgarten M. A telephone support service to reduce medical care use among the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1988;36(4):306–11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wasson J, Gaudette C, Whaley F, Sauvigne A, Baribeau P, Welch G. Telephone care as a substitute for routine clinic follow-up. JAMA. 1992;267:1788–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Evens S, Curtis P, Talbot A, Baer C, Smart A. Characteristics and perceptions of after-hours callers. Fam Pract. 1985;2:10–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Darnell J, Hiner S, Neill P, et al. After-hours telephone access to physicians with access to computerized medical records. Med Care. 1985;23:20–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fosarelli P, Schmitt B. Telephone dissatisfaction in pediatric practice: Denver and Baltimore. Pediatrics. 1987;80(1):28–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fosarelli P, Katz H. Residents on the phone. Pediatrics. 1987;79(2:311–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hannis M, Elnicki M, Morris D, Flannery M, and the TELI Group. Can you hold please? How internal medicine residents deal with patient telephone calls. Am J Med Sci. 1994;308(6):349–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fleming M, Skochelak S, Curtis P, Evens S. Evaluating the effectiveness of a telephone medicine curriculum. Med Care. 1988;26(2):211–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huber E, George D, and the TELI Group. Are internal medicine graduates prepared for telephone practice? J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9(suppl 2):77.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perrin E, Goodman H. Telephone management of acute pediatric illness. N Engl J Med. 1978;298:130–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Curtis P. The practice of medicine on the telephone. J Gen Intern Med. 1988;3:294–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wood P. Pediatric resident training in telephone management: a survey of training programs in the United States. Pediatrics. 1986;77(6):822–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Curtis P, Talbot A, Liebeseller V. The after-hours call: a survey of United States family practice residency programs. J Fam Pract. 1979;8(1):117–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    SAS Institute. The PRINCOMP and VARIMAX procedures. In: SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 6.03. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 1988;751–72.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    SAS Institute. Standard least squares model fitting and stepwise regression. In: JMP Statistics and Graphics Guide, Version 3. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 1994;137–71, 197-231.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    DeVellis R. Guidelines in scale development. In: Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications; 1991;51–90.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Elnicki M, Hannis M, Flannery M, and the TELI Group. The inadequate preparation of residents for telephone interactions with ambulatory patients. J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9(suppl 2):74.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cykert S, Elnicki D, Flannery M, and the TELI Group. Factors affecting residents’ attitudes toward patient telephone encounters. J Gen Intern Med. 1994;9(suppl 2):73.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Madlon-Kay D. Institution of a “no narcotics” policy for after-hours telephone calls. J Fam Pract. 1991;32(6):92–4.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Freeman T. A study of telephone prescriptions in family practice. J Fam Pract. 1980;10:857–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Spencer D, Daugird A. The nature and content of telephone prescribing habits in a community practice. Fam Med. 1990;22:205–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hamadeh G. Documentation of after-hours telephone contacts by family medicine residents. Fam Med. 1989;21:305–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Verdile V, Paris P, Stewart R, Verdile L. Emergency department telephone advice. Ann Emerg Med. 1989;18(3):278–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Katz H, Wick W. Malpractice, meningitis, and the telephone. Pediatr Ann. 1991;20(2):85–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Killilia B. Undocumented phone calls: a liability issue. Indiana Med. 1990;83(10):768–9.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Elnicki M, Hannis M, Cykert S, Flannery M, Morris K, Keyserling T, Devellis R, and the TELI Group. The use of factorially derived scales to assess issues affecting residents’ attitudes about telephone medicine for ambulatory patients. Teaching and Learning in Medicine. 1996;8(3):142–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Minnesota Medical Association. Prescribing issues grant report to the board of medical examiners. Minn Med. 1990;73:36–42.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Greenhouse D, Probst J. After-hours calls in a family practice residency: volume, seriousness and patient satisfaction, Fam Med. 1995;27:525–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wood P, Littlefield J, Foulds D. Telephone management curriculum for pediatric interns: a controlled trial. Pediatrics. 1989;83:925–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Marklund B, Silfverhielm B, Bengtsson C. Evaluation of an educational programme for telephone advisers in primary health care. Fam Pract. 1989;6(4):263–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark D. Hannis
    • 1
  • Ruth L Hazard
  • Marylee Rothschild
  • D. Michael Elnicki
  • Thomas C. Keyserling
  • Robert F. DeVellis
  • the TELI Group
  1. 1.East Carolina University School of MedicineGreenville

Personalised recommendations