Patient Preferences for Utilization of Telemedicine in Aesthetic Surgery Consultations

Telemedicine has been increasingly utilized by plastic surgeons since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic as it minimizes visit time, costs, and viral exposures. However, patient comfort level and preference for telemedicine visits in the aesthetic surgery perioperative period remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient comfort and preferences regarding perioperative telemedicine visits for aesthetic surgery.

An IRB-approved cross-sectional survey was conducted in January 2022 on Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform to assess respondents' comfort and preferences regarding periprocedural telemedicine visits. Survey responses were compared using descriptive and multivariate analyses.

A total of 505 participants (54% male, 46% female; mean age 37.7±11.5 years) completed the survey. The majority of respondents reported feeling either very or somewhat comfortable having their initial consult via telemedicine for both aesthetic surgery (72%) and non-surgical aesthetic procedures (74%). Respondents were most comfortable having an initial telemedicine consult for head and neck procedures, and least comfortable having telemedicine consults for sensitive areas, including the breast and buttocks. Respondents were significantly more comfortable scheduling non-surgical procedures than surgical procedures after a telemedicine consult alone (65% vs 58%; p < 0.001).

Our data suggests that the majority of aesthetic surgery patients are comfortable with having initial consultations via telemedicine. Particularly in young patients seeking non-surgical aesthetic procedures, telemedicine consults alone may be substituted for in-office visits prior to procedural scheduling. However, for operations and procedures requiring physical examination of sensitive areas, including the breasts and gluteal regions, in-person visits remain the preferred modality.

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .