Dataset Information

Patient confidentiality within the context of group medical visits: is there cause for concern?

ABSTRACT:

Background

Group medical visits (GMVs), clinical encounters with a medical component delivered to groups of patients, have emerged as an innovative approach to potentially increasing efficiency while enhancing the quality of primary health care (PHC). GMVs have created the need to pay explicit attention to patient confidentiality.

Objective

What strategies are used by providers and patients to address issues of confidentiality within GMVs?

Design

In-depth interviews were conducted with 34 PHC providers and 29 patients living in nine rural communities in British Columbia, Canada. Data were analysed using interpretive thematic analysis and a relational autonomy approach.

Results

We found three main themes: (i) choosing to disclose: balancing benefits and drawbacks of GMVs, (ii) maintaining confidentiality in GMVs and (iii) gaining strength from interdependent relationships: patients learning from each other. Confidentiality can be addressed and was not a major concern for patients attending or providers facilitating GMVs in these rural communities.

Discussion

Patients adopted strategies to address their own and others' concerns related to confidential health information. Providers used multiple strategies to maintain confidentiality within the group, including renegotiating what information is shared and providing examples of what information ought to be kept confidential.

Conclusions

Although GMVs are not for all patients, a relational autonomy approach is useful in drawing attention to the context and structures which may influence their patients' ability to act autonomously. Successful delivery of GMVs requires both patients and providers to negotiate between maintaining confidentiality and an appropriate level of disclosure.

SUBMITTER: Wong ST

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5060870 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient confidentiality within the context of group medical visits: is there cause for concern?

Wong Sabrina T ST Lavoie Josee G JG Browne Annette J AJ MacLeod Martha L P ML Chongo Meck M

Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 20131209 5

<h4>Background</h4>Group medical visits (GMVs), clinical encounters with a medical component delivered to groups of patients, have emerged as an innovative approach to potentially increasing efficiency while enhancing the quality of primary health care (PHC). GMVs have created the need to pay explicit attention to patient confidentiality.<h4>Objective</h4>What strategies are used by providers and patients to address issues of confidentiality within GMVs?<h4>Design</h4>In-depth interviews were co ...[more]

PMID: 24314271

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEncouraging professional integrity is vital for providing a standard of excellence in quality medical care and education and in promoting a culture of respect and responsibility. The primary objective of this work consisted of studying the relationship of medical students to the right to patient privacy in Spain, specifically by analysing the conditions for accessing patient clinical histories (CHs).MethodsA cross-sectional study was conducted based on a questionnaire sent by e-mail to final-year students at 41 Spanish universities. It had 14 multiple choice and closed questions framed in 3 large blocks. The first question addressed basic general knowledge issues on the right to privacy and the obligation for confidentiality. The two remaining blocks were made up of questions directed towards evaluating the frequency with which certain requirements and action steps related to students attending patients were performed and regarding the guarantees associated with accessing and handling patient CHs both on paper and in the Electronic Medical Record.ResultsA total of 245 valid replies were considered. A total of 67.8 % of participants were women, with an average age of 24.05 ± 3.49 years. Up to 90.6 % were aware that confidentiality affected the data in CHs, although 43.3 % possessed non-anonymized photocopies of patient clinical reports outside the healthcare context, and only 49.8 % of the students were always adequately identified. A total of 59.2 % accessed patient CHs on some occasions by using passwords belonging to healthcare professionals, 77.2 % of them did not have the patients' express consent, and 71.9 % accessed a CH that was not anonymised.ConclusionsThe role of healthcare institutions and universities is considered to be fundamental in implementing educational measures regarding the risks and ethical and legal problems arising from the use of CHs among professionals and students. A thorough study of medical ethics is needed through the analysis of clinical cases and direct exposure to situations in which the patient's confidentiality is questioned.

Project description:ImportanceTraditionally, group medical visits (GMVs) for persons with diabetes improved glycemia by intensifying medications, which infrequently led to weight loss. Incorporating GMVs with intensive dietary change could enable weight loss and improve glycemia while decreasing medication intensity.ObjectiveTo examine whether a program of GMVs combined with intensive weight management (WM) is noninferior to GMVs alone for change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level at 48 weeks (prespecified margin of 0.5%) and superior to GMVs alone for hypoglycemic events, diabetes medication intensity, and weight loss.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial identified via the electronic medical record 2814 outpatients with type 2 diabetes, uncontrolled HbA1c, and body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 27 or higher from Veterans Affairs Medical Center clinics in Durham and Greenville, North Carolina. Between January 12, 2015, and May 30, 2017, 263 outpatients started the intervention.InterventionsParticipants randomized to the GMV group (n = 136) received counseling about diabetes-related topics with medication optimization every 4 weeks for 16 weeks, then every 8 weeks (9 visits). Participants randomized to the WM/GMV group (n = 127) received low-carbohydrate diet counseling with baseline medication reduction and subsequent medication optimization every 2 weeks for 16 weeks followed by an abbreviated GMV intervention every 8 weeks (13 visits).Main outcomes and measuresOutcomes included HbA1c level, hypoglycemic events, diabetes medication effect score, and weight at 48 weeks analyzed using hierarchical generalized mixed models to account for clustering within group sessions.ResultsAmong 263 participants (mean [SD] age, 60.7 [8.2] years; 235 [89.4%] men; 143 [54.4%] black), baseline HbA1c level was 9.1% (1.3%) and BMI was 35.3 (5.1). At 48 weeks, HbA1c level was improved in both study arms (8.2% in the WM/GMV arm and 8.3% in the GMV arm; mean difference, -0.1%; 95% CI, -0.5% to 0.2%; upper 95% CI, <0.5% threshold; P = .44). The WM/GMV arm had lower diabetes medication use (mean difference in medication effect score, -0.5; 95% CI, -0.6 to -0.3; P < .001) and greater weight loss (mean difference, -3.7 kg; 95% CI, -5.5 to -1.9 kg; P < .001) than did the GMV arm at 48 weeks and approximately 50% fewer hypoglycemic events (incidence rate ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.71; P < .001) during the 48-week period.Conclusions and relevanceIn GMVs for diabetes, addition of WM using a low-carbohydrate diet was noninferior for lowering HbA1c levels compared with conventional medication management and showed advantages in other clinically important outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01973972.

Project description:AimTo characterize child neurology telemedicine visits flagged as requiring in-person evaluation during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodWe analyzed 7130 audio-video telemedicine visits between March and November 2020. Visits of concern (VOCs) were defined as telemedicine visits where the clinical scenario necessitated in-person follow-up evaluation sooner than if the visit had been conducted in-person.ResultsVOCs occurred in 5% (333/7130) of visits for 292 individuals (148 females, 144 males). Providers noted technical challenges more often in VOCs (40%; 133/333) than visits without concern (non-VOCs) (28%; 1922/6797) (p < 0.05). The median age was younger in VOCs (9 years 3 months, interquartile range [IQR] 2 years 0 months-14 years 3 months) than non-VOCs (11 years 3 months, IQR 5 years 10 months-15 years 10 months) (p < 0.05). Median household income was lower for patients with VOCs ($74 K, IQR $55 K-$97 K) compared to non-VOCs ($80 K, IQR $61 K-$100 K) (p < 0.05). Compared with all other race categories, families who self-identified as Black were more likely to have a VOC (odds ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.21-2.06). Epilepsy and headache represented the highest percentages of VOCs, while neuromuscular disorders and developmental delay had a higher proportion of VOCs than other neurological disorders.InterpretationThese findings suggest that telemedicine is an effective platform for most child neurology visits. Younger children and those with neuromuscular disorders or developmental delays are more likely to require in-person evaluation.What this paper addsIt is possible to successfully flag patients who need in-person assessment. Providers can manage issues arising during telemedicine in 95% of visits. Visits flagged as concerning were likely unrelated to modality of patient care. Provider concern was independent of technical difficulties for most telehealth visits. Younger age may be correlated with need for in-person assessment.

Project description:PurposeWomen with breast cancer have complex and unique gynecologic needs that are challenging to effectively and comprehensively meet in a traditional gynecology visit format. Group medical visits are an effective and well-received model of care in other disease settings and can provide comprehensive health education as an adjunct to one-on-one evaluation and treatment. There are limited data regarding the use of this type of health care delivery in providing gynecology-focused care to women affected by breast cancer.MethodsA group medical visit model was created for gynecology providers to see new breast cancer patient consults. From May 2012 to February 2014, 148 patients (3-6 per group) participated in a 1-hour informational session followed by a 15- to 30-minute individual visit with a physician that included history, physical examination and evaluation. We surveyed 101 women who attended these visits to evaluate a group model for providing gynecologic care and educational support to women with breast cancer.ResultsOf those who responded to the survey question, 100% agreed or somewhat agreed that their expectations for an initial intake visit were met during the group visit; 81% agreed or somewhat agreed that they felt a group visit was preferable to an individual introductory visit. More than 95% agreed or somewhat agreed that the information was understandable and their questions were answered during the visit. Only 5 respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the additional time commitment for this type of visit.ConclusionsThe majority of women surveyed expressed satisfaction with their experience with a group visit format. The women who participated preferred this format compared to an individual intake appointment when establishing gynecology care after breast cancer diagnosis/treatment, regardless of age, menopausal status, cancer stage or hormone receptor status. While further studies are warranted to directly compare and further assess satisfaction and efficacy, gynecologists may consider using a group model to provide comprehensive education and care to this patient population.

Dataset Information

Patient confidentiality within the context of group medical visits: is there cause for concern?

Background

Objective

Design

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

Publications

Patient confidentiality within the context of group medical visits: is there cause for concern?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets