- Virtual outpatient psychiatric appointments showed higher completion than in-person care: 90.9% versus 83.8%, difference +7.2 percentage points.
- Virtual care had substantially lower offered-slot utilisation than in-person care: 73.0% versus 90.5%, difference -17.5 percentage points.
- Attendance and capacity use should be evaluated separately when planning hybrid psychiatric services.
medRxiv [Preprint]. 2026 Sep 10:2026.09.08.26362068. doi: 10.64898/2026.09.08.26362068.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare appointment completion and offered-slot utilization between virtual and in-person outpatient psychiatric care in Peru.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective ecological longitudinal study using routinely collected monthly aggregate administrative indicators from January 2022 through June 2026, with modality-month as the unit. Virtual-minus-in-person differences and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using Newey-West standard errors with 12 lags. June 2026 was partial; slot utilization was restricted to 2024-2026.
RESULTS: Across 54 paired months, mean completion was 90.9% (SD=3.9) for virtual and 83.8% (SD=2.7) for in-person care; difference +7.2 percentage points (95% CI=4.4-9.9). Across 30 paired months, slot utilization was 73.0% (SD=8.3) and 90.5% (SD=3.8), respectively; difference -17.5 percentage points (95% CI=-24.5 to -10.4). Sensitivity analyses were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: Virtual care had higher completion but lower slot utilization. Attendance and capacity use should be evaluated separately when planning hybrid psychiatric services.
PMID:42818455 | PMC:PMC13622772 | DOI:10.64898/2026.09.08.26362068
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes
Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List
