Dataset Information

Use of virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting: how do changes in the work of being a patient influence patient preferences? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To systematically review qualitative studies reporting the use of virtual consultations within an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting and to understand how its use changes the work required of patients. METHODS:Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement, we conducted a systematic review of papers to answer the research question 'How do changes in the work of being a patient when using communication technology influence patient preferences?' Electronic databases were searched for studies meeting the inclusion criteria in April 2020. RESULTS:The search strategy identified 2057 research articles from the database search. A review of titles and abstracts using the inclusion criteria yielded 21 articles for full-text review. Nine studies were included in the final analysis. Six studies explored real-time video conferencing and three explored telephone consultations. The use of communication technology changes the work required of patients. Such changes will impact on expectations for care, resources required of patients, the environment of receiving care and patient-clinician interactions. This adjustment of the work required of patients who access orthopaedic rehabilitation using communication technology will impact on their experience of receiving care. It is proposed that changes in the work of being a patient will influence preferences for or against the use of communication technology consultations for orthopaedic rehabilitation. CONCLUSION:We found that the use of communication technology changes the work of being a patient. The change in work required of patients can be both burdensome (it makes it harder for patients to access their care) and beneficial (it makes it easier for patients to access their care). This change will likely to influence preferences. Keeping the concept of patient work at the heart of pathway redesign is likely to be a key consideration to ensure successful implementation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018100896.

SUBMITTER: Gilbert AW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7497523 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting: how do changes in the work of being a patient influence patient preferences? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

Gilbert Anthony W AW Jones Jeremy J Jaggi Anju A May Carl R CR

BMJ open 20200916 9

<h4>Objectives</h4>To systematically review qualitative studies reporting the use of virtual consultations within an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting and to understand how its use changes the work required of patients.<h4>Methods</h4>Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement, we conducted a systematic review of papers to answer the research question 'How do changes in the work of being a patient when using communication technology influence pati ...[more]

PMID: 32938591

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveVirtual Consultations may reduce the need for face-to-face outpatient appointments, thereby potentially reducing the cost and time involved in delivering health care. This study reports a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that identifies factors that influence patient preferences for virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting.MethodsPrevious research from the CONNECT (Care in Orthopaedics, burdeN of treatmeNt and the Effect of Communication Technology) Project and best practice guidance informed the development of our DCE. An efficient fractional factorial design with 16 choice scenarios was created that identified all main effects and partial two-way interactions. The design was divided into two blocks of eight scenarios each, to reduce the impact of cognitive fatigue. Data analysis were conducted using binary logit regression models.ResultsSixty-one paired response sets (122 subjects) were available for analysis. DCE factors (whether the therapist is known to the patient, duration of appointment, time of day) and demographic factors (patient qualifications, access to equipment, difficulty with activities, multiple health issues, travel costs) were significant predictors of preference. We estimate that a patient is less than 1% likely to prefer a virtual consultation if the patient has a degree, is without access to the equipment and software to undertake a virtual consultation, does not have difficulties with day-to-day activities, is undergoing rehabilitation for one problem area, has to pay less than £5 to travel, is having a consultation with a therapist not known to them, in 1 weeks' time, lasting 60 minutes, at 2 pm. We have developed a simple conceptual model to explain how these factors interact to inform preference, including patients' access to resources, context for the consultation and the requirements of the consultation.ConclusionsThis conceptual model provides the framework to focus attention towards factors that might influence patient preference for virtual consultations. Our model can inform the development of future technologies, trials, and qualitative work to further explore the mechanisms that influence preference.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Technology has been placed at the centre of global health policy and has been cited as having the potential to increase efficiency and remove geographical boundaries for patients to access care. Communication technology may support patients with orthopaedic problems, which is one of the leading causes of disability worldwide. There are several examples of technology being used in clinical research, although uptake in practice remains low. An understanding of patient preferences will support the design of a communication technology supported treatment pathway for patients undergoing orthopaedic rehabilitation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:This mixed methods project will be conducted in four phases. In phase I, a systematic review of qualitative studies reporting communication technology use for orthopaedic rehabilitation will be conducted to devise a taxonomy of tasks patients' face when using these technologies to access their care. In phase II, qualitative interviews will investigate how the work of being a patient changes during face-to-face and communication technology consultations and how these changes influence preference. In phase III, a discrete choice experiment will investigate the factors that influence preferences for the use of communication technology for orthopaedic rehabilitation consultations. Phase IV will be a practical application of these results. We will design a 'minimally disruptive' communication technology supported pathway for patients undergoing orthopaedic rehabilitation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The design of a pathway and underpinning patient preference will assist in understanding factors that might influence technology implementation for clinical care. This study requires ethical approval for phases II, III and IV. Approvals have been received for phase II (approval received on 4 December 2016 from the South Central-Oxford C Research Ethics Committee (IRAS ID: 255172, REC Reference 18/SC/0663)) and phase III (approval received on 18 October 2019 from the London-Hampstead Research Ethics Committee (IRAS ID: 248064, REC Reference 19/LO/1586)) and will be sought for phase IV. All participants will provide informed written consent prior to being enrolled onto the study. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018100896.

Project description:ObjectivesTo conduct a qualitative investigation on a subset of participants from a previously completed Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to understand why factors identified from the DCE are important, how they influenced preference for virtual consultations (VC) and how COVID-19 has influenced preference for VC.MethodsA quota sample was recruited from participants who participated in our DCE. We specifically targeted participants who were strongly in favour of face-to-face consultations (F2F - defined as choosing all or mostly F2F in the DCE) or strongly in favour of virtual consultations (VC - defined as choosing all or mostly VC consultations in the DCE) to elicit a range of views. Interviews were conducted via telephone or videoconference, audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and uploaded into NVIVO software. A directed content analysis of transcripts was undertaken in accordance with a coding framework based on the results of the DCE and the impact of COVID-19 on preference.ResultsEight F2F and 5 VC participants were included. Shorter appointments were less 'worth' travelling in for than a longer appointment and rush hour travel had an effect on whether travelling was acceptable, particularly when patients experienced pain as a result of extended journeys. Socioeconomic factors such as cost of travel, paid time off work, access to equipment and support in its use was important. Physical examinations were preferable in the clinic whereas talking therapies were acceptable over VC. Several participants commented on how VC interferes with the patient-clinician relationship. VC during COVID-19 has provided patients with the opportunity to access their care virtually without the need for travel. For some, this was extremely positive.ConclusionsThis study investigated the results of a previously completed DCE and the impact of COVID-19 on patient preferences for VC. Theoretically informative insights were gained to explain the results of the DCE. The use of VC during the COVID-19 pandemic provided opportunities to access care without the need for face-to-face social interactions. Many felt that VC would become more commonplace after the pandemic, whereas others were keen to return to F2F consultations as much as possible. This qualitative study provides additional context to the results of a previously completed DCE.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Chronic kidney disease (CKD) requires patients and caregivers to invest in self-care and self-management of their disease. We aimed to describe the work for adult patients that follows from these investments and develop an understanding of burden of treatment (BoT). METHODS:Systematic review of qualitative primary studies that builds on EXPERTS1 Protocol, PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014014547. We included research published in English, Spanish and Portuguese, from 2000 to present, describing experience of illness and healthcare of people with CKD and caregivers. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO, Scopus, Scientific Electronic Library Online and Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina y el Caribe, España y Portugal. Content was analysed with theoretical framework using middle-range theories. RESULTS:Searches resulted in 260 studies from 30 countries (5115 patients and 1071 carers). Socioeconomic status was central to the experience of CKD, especially in its advanced stages when renal replacement treatment is necessary. Unfunded healthcare was fragmented and of indeterminate duration, with patients often depending on emergency care. Treatment could lead to unemployment, and in turn, to uninsurance or underinsurance. Patients feared catastrophic events because of diminished financial capacity and made strenuous efforts to prevent them. Transportation to and from haemodialysis centre, with variable availability and cost, was a common problem, aggravated for patients in non-urban areas, or with young children, and low resources. Additional work for those uninsured or underinsured included fund-raising. Transplanted patients needed to manage finances and responsibilities in an uncertain context. Information on the disease, treatment options and immunosuppressants side effects was a widespread problem. CONCLUSIONS:Being a person with end-stage kidney disease always implied high burden, time-consuming, invasive and exhausting tasks, impacting on all aspects of patients' and caregivers' lives. Further research on BoT could inform healthcare professionals and policy makers about factors that shape patients' trajectories and contribute towards a better illness experience for those living with CKD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42014014547.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Workers with persistent disabilities after orthopaedic trauma may need occupational rehabilitation. Despite various risk profiles for non-return-to-work (non-RTW), there is no available predictive model. Moreover, injured workers may have various origins (immigrant workers), which may either affect their return to work or their eligibility for research purposes. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a predictive model that estimates the likelihood of non-RTW after occupational rehabilitation using predictors which do not rely on the worker's background. METHODS: Prospective cohort study (3177 participants, native (51%) and immigrant workers (49%)) with two samples: a) Development sample with patients from 2004 to 2007 with Full and Reduced Models, b) External validation of the Reduced Model with patients from 2008 to March 2010. We collected patients' data and biopsychosocial complexity with an observer rated interview (INTERMED). Non-RTW was assessed two years after discharge from the rehabilitation. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) and calibration was evaluated with a calibration plot. The model was reduced with random forests. RESULTS: At 2 years, the non-RTW status was known for 2462 patients (77.5% of the total sample). The prevalence of non-RTW was 50%. The full model (36 items) and the reduced model (19 items) had acceptable discrimination performance (AUC 0.75, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.78 and 0.74, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.76, respectively) and good calibration. For the validation model, the discrimination performance was acceptable (AUC 0.73; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.77) and calibration was also adequate. CONCLUSIONS: Non-RTW may be predicted with a simple model constructed with variables independent of the patient's education and language fluency. This model is useful for all kinds of trauma in order to adjust for case mix and it is applicable to vulnerable populations like immigrant workers.

Project description:ObjectivePreference for asthma management and the use of medications is motivated by the interplay between lived experiences of asthma and patients' attitudes towards medications. Many previous studies have focused on individual aspects of asthma management, such as the use of preventer and reliever inhalers. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the preferences of patients with mild-moderate asthma for asthma management as a whole and factors that influenced these preferences.DesignA qualitative study employing qualitative descriptive analysis situated within a constructionist epistemology to analyse transcribed audio recordings from focus groups.SettingThree locations within the greater Wellington area in New Zealand.ParticipantsTwenty-seven adults with self-reported doctor's diagnosis of asthma, taking short-acting beta-agonists alone or inhaled corticosteroids with or without long-acting beta2-agonist, who had used any inhaled asthma medication within the last month.ResultsFour key areas described preferences for asthma management. Preferences for self-management: participants wanted to be in control of their asthma and developed personal strategies to achieve this. Preferences for the specific medications or treatment regimen: participants preferred regimens that were convenient and reliably relieved symptoms. Preferences for inhaler devices: devices that had dose counters and were easy to use and portable were important. Preferences for asthma services: participants wanted easier access to their inhalers and to be empowered by their healthcare providers. Participant preferences within each of these four areas were influenced by the impact asthma had on their life, their health beliefs, emotional consequences of asthma and perceived barriers to asthma management.ConclusionsThis study illustrates the interaction of the lived experience of asthma, factors specific to the individual, and factors relating to asthma treatments in shaping patient preferences for asthma management. This aids our understanding of preferences for asthma management from the patient perspective.Trial registration numberAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000601134).

Dataset Information

Use of virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting: how do changes in the work of being a patient influence patient preferences? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

Publications

Use of virtual consultations in an orthopaedic rehabilitation setting: how do changes in the work of being a patient influence patient preferences? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure