Benefits and Challenges of Using Virtual Primary Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An International Cross-sectional Survey Study (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edmond Li ◽  
Rosy Tsopra ◽  
Geronimo Jimenez ◽  
Alice Serafini ◽  
Gustavo Gusso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Remote Care

BACKGROUND With the onset of COVID-19, general practitioners (GPs) and patients worldwide swiftly transitioned from face-to-face to digital remote consultations. There is a need to evaluate how this global shift has impacted patient care, healthcare providers, patient and carer experience, and health systems. OBJECTIVE We explored GPs’ perspectives on the main benefits and challenges of using digital remote care. METHODS GPs across 20 countries completed an online questionnaire between June – September 2020. GPs’ perceptions on main barriers and challenges were explored using free-text questions. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS A total of 1,605 respondents participated in our survey. The benefits identified included reducing COVID-19 transmission risks, guaranteeing access and continuity of care, improved efficiency, faster access to care, improved convenience and communication with patients, greater work flexibility for providers, and hastening the digital transformation of primary care and accompanying legal frameworks. Main challenges included patient’s preference for face-to-face consultations, digital exclusion, lack of physical examinations, clinical uncertainty, delays in diagnosis and treatment, overuse and misuse of digital remote care, and unsuitability for certain types of consultations. Other challenges include the lack of formal guidance, higher workloads, remuneration issues, organisational culture, technical difficulties, implementation and financial issues, and regulatory weaknesses. CONCLUSIONS At the frontline of care delivery, GPs can provide important insights on what worked well, why, and how during the pandemic. Lessons learned can be used to inform the adoption of improved virtual care solutions, and support the long-term development of platforms that are more technologically robust, secure. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-10.2196/30099

scholarly journals Benefits and Challenges of Using Virtual Primary Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: From Key Lessons to a Framework for Implementation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edmond C Li ◽  
Rosy Tsopra ◽  
Geronimo Larrain Gimenez ◽  
Alice Serafini ◽  
Gustavo Gusso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Need To Evaluate ◽  
Barriers And Challenges ◽  
Remote Care

Background: With the onset of COVID-19, general practitioners (GPs) and patients worldwide swiftly transitioned from face-to-face to digital remote consultations. There is a need to evaluate how this global shift has impacted patient care, healthcare providers, patient and carer experience, and health systems. Objective: We explored GPs' perspectives on the main benefits and challenges of using digital remote care. Methods: GPs across 20 countries completed an online questionnaire between June - September 2020. GPs' perceptions on main barriers and challenges were explored using free-text questions. Thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Results: 1,605 respondents participated in our survey. The benefits identified included reducing COVID-19 transmission risks, guaranteeing access and continuity of care, improved efficiency, faster access to care, improved convenience and communication with patients, greater work flexibility for providers, and hastening the digital transformation of primary care and the accompanying legal frameworks. Main challenges included patient's preference for face-to-face consultations, digital exclusion, lack of physical examinations, clinical uncertainty, delays in diagnosis and treatment, overuse and misuse of digital remote care, and unsuitability for certain types of consultations. Other challenges include the lack of formal guidance, higher workloads, remuneration issues, organisational culture, technical difficulties, implementation and financial issues, and regulatory weaknesses. Conclusion: At the frontline of care delivery, GPs can provide important insights on what worked well, why, and how. Lessons learned during the emergency phase can be used to inform the stable adoption of virtual care solutions, and co-design processes and platforms that are technologically robust, secure, and supported by a strategic long-term plan.

scholarly journals People’s Experiences and Satisfaction With Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

10.2196/24531 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. e24531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer MJ Isautier ◽  
Tessa Copp ◽  
Julie Ayre ◽  
Erin Cvejic ◽  
Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Services ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Patient Activation ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medical Appointment ◽  
Free Text Response

Background In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth has rapidly been adopted to deliver health care services around the world. To date, studies have not compared people’s experiences with telehealth services during the pandemic in Australia to their experiences with traditional in-person visits. Objective This study aimed to compare participants’ perceptions of telehealth consults to their perceptions of traditional in-person visits and investigate whether people believe that telehealth services would be useful after the pandemic. Methods A national, cross-sectional, community survey was conducted between June 5 and June 12, 2020 in Australia. In total, 1369 participants who were aged ≥18 years and lived in Australia were recruited via targeted advertisements on social media (ie, Facebook and Instagram). Participants responded to survey questions about their telehealth experience, which included a free-text response option. A generalized linear model was used to estimate the adjusted relative risks of having a poorer telehealth experience than a traditional in-person visit experience. Content analysis was performed to determine the reasons why telehealth experiences were worse than traditional in-person visit experiences. Results Of the 596 telehealth users, the majority of respondents (n=369, 61.9%) stated that their telehealth experience was “just as good as” or “better than” their traditional in-person medical appointment experience. On average, respondents perceived that telehealth would be moderately useful to very useful for medical appointments after the COVID-19 pandemic ends (mean 3.67, SD 1.1). Being male (P=.007), having a history of both depression and anxiety (P=.016), and lower patient activation scores (ie, individuals’ willingness to take on the role of managing their health/health care) (P=.036) were significantly associated with a poor telehealth experience. In total, 6 overarching themes were identified from free-text responses for why participants’ telehealth experiences were poorer than their traditional in-person medical appointment experiences, as follows: communication is not as effective, limitations with technology, issues with obtaining prescriptions and pathology results, reduced confidence in their doctor, additional burden for complex care, and inability to be physically examined. Conclusions Based on our sample’s responses, telehealth appointment experiences were comparable to traditional in-person medical appointment experiences. Telehealth may be worthwhile as a mode of health care delivery while the pandemic continues, and it may continue to be worthwhile after the pandemic.

scholarly journals People’s Experiences and Satisfaction With Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: Cross-Sectional Survey Study (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer MJ Isautier ◽  
Tessa Copp ◽  
Julie Ayre ◽  
Erin Cvejic ◽  
Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Services ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Patient Activation ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Medical Appointment ◽  
Free Text Response

BACKGROUND In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth has rapidly been adopted to deliver health care services around the world. To date, studies have not compared people’s experiences with telehealth services during the pandemic in Australia to their experiences with traditional in-person visits. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to compare participants’ perceptions of telehealth consults to their perceptions of traditional in-person visits and investigate whether people believe that telehealth services would be useful after the pandemic. METHODS A national, cross-sectional, community survey was conducted between June 5 and June 12, 2020 in Australia. In total, 1369 participants who were aged ≥18 years and lived in Australia were recruited via targeted advertisements on social media (ie, Facebook and Instagram). Participants responded to survey questions about their telehealth experience, which included a free-text response option. A generalized linear model was used to estimate the adjusted relative risks of having a poorer telehealth experience than a traditional in-person visit experience. Content analysis was performed to determine the reasons why telehealth experiences were worse than traditional in-person visit experiences. RESULTS Of the 596 telehealth users, the majority of respondents (n=369, 61.9%) stated that their telehealth experience was “just as good as” or “better than” their traditional in-person medical appointment experience. On average, respondents perceived that telehealth would be moderately useful to very useful for medical appointments after the COVID-19 pandemic ends (mean 3.67, SD 1.1). Being male (<i>P</i>=.007), having a history of both depression and anxiety (<i>P</i>=.016), and lower patient activation scores (ie, individuals’ willingness to take on the role of managing their health/health care) (<i>P</i>=.036) were significantly associated with a poor telehealth experience. In total, 6 overarching themes were identified from free-text responses for why participants’ telehealth experiences were poorer than their traditional in-person medical appointment experiences, as follows: communication is not as effective, limitations with technology, issues with obtaining prescriptions and pathology results, reduced confidence in their doctor, additional burden for complex care, and inability to be physically examined. CONCLUSIONS Based on our sample’s responses, telehealth appointment experiences were comparable to traditional in-person medical appointment experiences. Telehealth may be worthwhile as a mode of health care delivery while the pandemic continues, and it may continue to be worthwhile after the pandemic.

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Use of the After Visit Summary in a Primary Care Internal Medicine Practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 703-707
Author(s):  
Sarita Pathak ◽  
Gregory Summerville ◽  
Celia P Kaplan ◽  
Sarah S Nouri ◽  
Leah S Karliner
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Free Text ◽  
Primary Care Visit ◽  
Communication Tool ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Care Visit ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Communication Errors

Participants completed a cross-sectional survey about their use of the after visit summary (AVS) at a previous primary care visit. Of 355 participants, 294 (82.8%) recalled receiving it, 67.4% consulted it, 45.9% consulted it more than once, and 31.6% shared the AVS. In multivariable analysis, higher education and older age were associated with AVS consultation. Among the subset of 133 patients recalling personalized free-text instructions, 96% found them easy to understand and 94.4% found them useful. Our findings suggest that the AVS is a useful communication tool and improvement efforts should emphasize clarity for those most vulnerable to communication errors.

scholarly journals Examining patient distress and unmet need for support across UK renal units with varying models of psychosocial care delivery: a cross-sectional survey study

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e036931
Author(s):  
Maaike Seekles ◽  
Paula Ormandy ◽  
Daiga Kamerāde
Keyword(s):  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Psychosocial Service ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Need For Support

ObjectiveTo examine in-centre haemodialysis patients’ emotional distress and need for support across UK renal units with varying models of psychosocial service provision.DesignThe study used a cross-sectional survey design. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine patient distress, as captured by the Distress Thermometer, and need for support, across different renal units.SettingSeven renal units across England, Wales and Scotland. The units were purposively selected so that varying workforce models of renal psychosocial services were represented.ParticipantsIn total, 752 patients were on dialysis in the participating centres on the days of data collection. All adult patients, who could understand English, and with capacity (as determined by the nurse in charge), were eligible to participate in the study. The questionnaire was completed by 509 patients, resulting in an overall response rate of 67.7%.Outcome measuresThe prevalence of distress and patient-reported need for support.ResultsThe results showed that 48.9% (95% CI 44.5 to 53.4) of respondents experienced distress. A significant association between distress and models of renal psychosocial service provision was found (χ2(6)=15.05, p=0.019). Multivariable logistic regression showed that patients in units with higher total psychosocial staffing ratios (OR 0.65 (95% CI 0.47 to 0.89); p=0.008) and specifically higher social work ratios (OR 0.49 (95% CI 0.33 to 0.74); p=0.001) were less likely to experience distress, even after controlling for demographic variables. In addition, a higher patient-reported unmet need for support was found in units where psychosocial staffing numbers are low or non-existent (χ2(6)=37.80, p<0.001).ConclusionsThe novel findings emphasise a need for increased incorporation of dedicated renal psychosocial staff into the renal care pathway. Importantly, these members of staff should be able to offer support for psychological as well as practical and social care-related issues.

The characteristics of Queensland private physiotherapy practitioners’ interprofessional interactions: a cross-sectional survey study

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 500
Author(s):  
Jack A. Seaton ◽  
Anne L. Jones ◽  
Catherine L. Johnston ◽  
Karen L. Francis
Keyword(s):  
Private Practice ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Interprofessional Collaboration ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Level Of Satisfaction ◽  
Cost Efficient ◽  
High Level

Effective interprofessional collaboration (IPC) contributes to superior patient outcomes, facilitates cost-efficient health care, and increases patient and practitioner satisfaction. However, there is concern that IPC may be difficult to implement in clinical settings that do not conform to formal team-based processes, such as mono-professional physiotherapy private practice facilities. The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics of private physiotherapy practitioners’ interprofessional interactions, including their experiences and perceptions regarding IPC. A custom developed cross-sectional online survey instrument was used to collect data from physiotherapists employed in private practice facilities in Queensland, Australia. In all, 49 (20% response rate) physiotherapists completed the survey. Only a small proportion (14%) indicated that their interprofessional interactions were a daily occurrence, and less than one-third of all respondents (31%) participated in formal, multi-professional face-to-face planned meetings. Most participants (76%) reported a moderate-to-high level of satisfaction regarding their interprofessional interactions. Despite low self-reported levels of interprofessional activity and other data indicating that IPC is necessary for holistic patient care, this study shows that physiotherapists were predominately satisfied when interacting with health practitioners from various professional backgrounds. Further research is required to inform the implementation of robust strategies that will support sustainable models of IPC in physiotherapy private practice.

scholarly journals Current issues in protocol registration for systematic review and meta-analysis studies: a survey of global researchers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gehad Mohamed Tawfik ◽  
Hoang Thi Nam Giang ◽  
Sherief Ghozy ◽  
Ahmed M. Altibi ◽  
Hend Kandil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Protocol Registration ◽  
Acceptance Interval ◽  
Lack Of Knowledge

Abstract Background Although protocol registration of systematic reviews/meta-analysis (SR/MA) is still not mandatory, authors are strongly suggested to publish their SR/MA protocols prior to submitting their manuscripts for publication as recommended by the Cochrane guidelines for conducting SR/MAs. We aimed to assess awareness, obstacles, and opinions of SR/MA authors about the protocol registration process.Methods A cross-sectional survey study included all authors who published SR/MAs during the period from 2010 to 2016 were contacted for participation in our survey study. They were identified through the literature search of SR/MAs in Scopus database. Upon receiving their approval to join our study, an online questionnaire was sent via e-mail to each participant.Results A total of 270 authors' responses were complete and were included in the final analysis. Our results showed that PROSPERO was the most commonly used database for protocol registration (71.3%). The registration-to-acceptance interval in PROSPERO was less than one month (99.1%). Almost half of the authors (44.2%) did not register their protocols prior to publishing their SR/MAs and their lack of knowledge of its importance was the most commonly reported reason (44.9%). A significant proportion of respondents (37.4%) believed that people would steal their ideas from protocol databases, while only 5.3% reported that their SR/MA had been stolen. However, the majority (72.9%) of participants agreed that protocol registries have a role in preventing unnecessary duplication of reviews. Finally, 37.4% of participants agreed that SR/MA protocol registration should be mandatory.Conclusion Lack of knowledge about SR/MA protocol registration process seems to be the primary reason for not registering such protocols. Therefore, interventions for increasing awareness about the benefits of protocol registration among researchers would be welcome.

scholarly journals Pharmacists’ Prescribing in Saudi Arabia: Cross-Sectional Study Describing Current Practices and Future Perspectives

Pharmacy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 160
Author(s):  
Alyaa M. Ajabnoor ◽  
Richard J. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Prescribing Practices ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Hospital Pharmacists ◽  
Pharmacist Prescribing ◽  
Independent Prescribing

Pharmacist prescribing is being increasingly undertaken to better use their skills and reduce the workload of existing prescribers such as doctors, often using formal processes to legitimate these activities. In developing countries like Saudi Arabia, however, pharmacists’ prescribing remains informal with no legislation or formal training and there is a lack of research and understanding into such practices. Therefore, we aimed to describe current pharmacist prescribing practices in Saudi Arabia and explore pharmacists’ views about pharmacists’ prescribing. This is a cross-sectional survey study using an online questionnaire of hospital pharmacists in Saudi Arabia about pharmacists’ prescribing, and associated views about prescribing legislation and barriers to implementing pharmacist prescribing. Over a quarter (28.5%) of pharmacists reported themselves as prescribers, 49% were following a collaborative prescribing model, 18% independent prescribing, and 33% were doing both. Ninety percent of prescribers reported confidence in prescribing the appropriate treatment and 92.3% perceived they will benefit from more prescribing training. Healthcare practice culture and pharmacist’s competency were identified as barriers. There is an overall support for pharmacists’ prescribing in Saudi Arabia among this sample of hospital pharmacists, with limitations in resources and the absence of standardized prescribing training being perceived as key barriers to pharmacists’ prescribing.

Physicians’ Perceptions Toward Use of Telemedicine During COVID-19 Pandemic in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
sarah idriss ◽  
walaa alasaadi ◽  
abdullah Aldhuhayyan ◽  
Ahmed alenzi ◽  
Reem alharbi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Health Care Delivery ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Face To Face

BACKGROUND The use of communication technologies to deliver health care remotely is known as telemedicine. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had a variety of consequences for health-care delivery in 2020. As a result, it was necessary to adapt and deliver high-quality care to patients while limiting possible viral exposure for both patients and health-care workers. During the pandemic, physicians employed video visits, phone visits, and electronic written visits (e-consultations), all of which have the ability to provide a comparable quality of care while removing social barriers. OBJECTIVE The study’s aim is to assess physicians’ perspectives and attitudes concerning the usage of telemedicine in Riyadh hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The main domains of the assessment are physicians’ overall experience with telemedicine use before and during COVID-19, future adaptability to using telemedicine, perceptions about patients’ experience, and the influence of telemedicine on burnout. METHODS Methods: An anonymous 28-question cross-sectional survey was developed using SurveyMonkey and distributed to all physicians from all specialty disciplines across Riyadh city hospitals. RESULTS A total of 362 doctors were included in the study. Among them, 28.7% were consultants, 30.4% were specialists, and 40.9% were residents. Male doctors formed the majority (56.1%). When asked about the frequency of using telemedicine, 41.4% answered “frequently,” 26% responded “occasionally,” and 32.6% said “never.” Thirty one percent of doctors agreed and somewhat agreed that the “quality of care during telemedicine is comparable with face-to-face visits.” About 55% doctors believed that telemedicine consultation is a cost-effective way, compared to face-to-face visits. Most of the doctors were skilled (70%) at telemedicine, and they were also able to solve technology issues during telemedicine visits (54%). Overall, the physicians felt that their patients liked telemedicine: 68% said they felt comfortable using telemedicine and 76% said theyfound that it saved time. As per the burnout question, 4.1% of doctors felt burnout every day, 7.5% felt burnout a few times a week, and 27.3% felt burnout a few times per month. CONCLUSIONS Physicians had a generally favorable attitude toward telemedicine, believing that the quality of health-care delivery using it was comparable to that of in-person care. Future research is needed to investigate how physicians’ attitudes toward telemedicine have changed since the pandemic, as well as how this virtual technology might be used to improve their professional and personal well-being.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document