# Virtual Visits in Pediatrics—Readiness, Barriers and Perceptions Among Healthcare Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Survey

## TL;DR

Pediatric healthcare professionals are interested in virtual visits but face barriers like lack of resources and digital confidence, especially among older and primary care professionals.

## Contribution

This study identifies age-related and setting-specific barriers to adopting virtual visits in pediatrics and highlights the need for tailored training and infrastructure improvements.

## Key findings

- Hospital-based pediatricians have better equipment and higher interest in virtual visits compared to primary care professionals.
- Older clinicians report more perceived barriers, including low confidence in handling digital tools.
- Most professionals believe virtual visits should be offered in their workplaces but require training and better infrastructure.

## Abstract

What are the main findings?
Pediatric healthcare professionals show a high interest in developing virtual visits (VVs), as an alternative and complementary option to in-person care, and they considered them especially useful for follow-up appointments, specialist consultations, and care of older children and adolescents.Primary care pediatricians have fewer technical resources and lower interest, while hospital-based pediatricians report better equipment and greater interest in VVs. In both settings, interest decreases as professionals’ age increases, and older clinicians report more perceived barriers, especially low confidence in handling computers or digital tools.

Pediatric healthcare professionals show a high interest in developing virtual visits (VVs), as an alternative and complementary option to in-person care, and they considered them especially useful for follow-up appointments, specialist consultations, and care of older children and adolescents.

Primary care pediatricians have fewer technical resources and lower interest, while hospital-based pediatricians report better equipment and greater interest in VVs. In both settings, interest decreases as professionals’ age increases, and older clinicians report more perceived barriers, especially low confidence in handling computers or digital tools.

What are the implications of the main findings?
Successful implementation requires improving technical infrastructures and providing specific training and preparation, especially for older professionals.Primary care professionals will additionally require stronger technical support to ensure equitable and effective implementation.

Successful implementation requires improving technical infrastructures and providing specific training and preparation, especially for older professionals.

Primary care professionals will additionally require stronger technical support to ensure equitable and effective implementation.

Background/Objectives: This study explores the perceptions, experiences, and expectations of pediatric healthcare professionals regarding the implementation of virtual visits (VVs) in routine pediatric practice. Methods: Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to analyze individual, organizational, and contextual factors influencing the adoption of pediatric virtual visits, we conducted a descriptive cross-sectional survey distributed nationwide among pediatricians, pediatric nurses, and residents. Results: A total of 308 Spanish healthcare professionals correctly completed the REDCap survey and were included in the analysis. The mean age was 44.3 years, and respondents represented both hospital-based (55.8%) and primary care professionals (44.2%). Overall, 74.8% had previous experience with telephone consultations, while only 11% had performed virtual visits. Most professionals believed VVs could be useful in primary care (81.3%) and hospital out-patient settings (73.9%), especially for follow-up appointments, communication of test results, and chronic-care monitoring. VVs were perceived as more appropriate for older children and adolescents than for infants. Major concerns included poor internet connection (52.6%), and data security (37.4%); however, a particularly relevant finding was the low confidence in using digital tools, particularly among older professionals. Comparative analyses by age and workplace setting identified differences in interest, perceived barriers, and access to technical resources. Hospital-based clinicians reported greater interest in adopting VVs and better access to technological resources compared with primary care professionals. The professionals’ age was inversely associated with interest in VVs. Notably, 72.6% of respondents expressed interest in receiving specific VV training, and nearly 90% believed virtual visits should be offered in their workplace. Conclusions: These findings show a high overall acceptance of VVs but also underline persistent barriers related to infrastructure, digital literacy, and clinical applicability in younger children. Addressing these obstacles through training, improved equipment, and clear clinical protocols will be essential for the successful implementation of pediatric VV programs.