Patient and provider perspectives of a new prenatal care model introduced in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Peahl AF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7543890 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a dramatic increase in virtual care (VC) across outpatient specialties, but little is known regarding provider acceptance of VC.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess provider perceptions of the quality, efficiency, and challenges of VC versus in-person care with masks.DesignThis was a voluntary survey.ParticipantsMental health (MH), primary care, medical specialty, and surgical specialty providers across the 8 VA New England Healthcare System medical centers.MeasuresProvider ratings of: (1) quality and efficiency of VC (phone and video telehealth) compared with in-person care with masks; (2) challenges of VC; and (3) percentage of patients that providers are comfortable seeing via VC in the future.ResultsThe sample included 998 respondents (49.8% MH, 20.6% primary care, 20.4% medical specialty, 9.1% surgical specialty; 61% response rate). Most providers rated VC as equivalent to or higher in quality and efficiency compared with in-person care with masks. Quality ratings were significantly higher for video versus phone (χ2=61.4, P<0.0001), but efficiency ratings did not differ significantly. Ratings varied across specialties (highest in MH, lowest in SS; all χ2s>24.1, Ps<0.001). Inability to conduct a physical examination and patient technical difficulties were significant challenges. MH providers were comfortable seeing a larger proportion of patients virtually compared with the other specialties (all χ2s>12.2, Ps<0.01).ConclusionsBroad provider support for VC was stratified across specialties, with the highest ratings in MH and lowest ratings in SS. Findings will inform the improvement of VC processes and the planning of health care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.
| S-EPMC8191369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To assess how obstetric health care providers counsel patients regarding prenatal genetic screening and how these conversations influence patients' screening decisions.This cohort study analyzed transcripts and audio recordings of 210 first prenatal visits collected as part of a larger study on patient-provider communication. Conversations were coded in an iterative process to determine compliance with American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (College) prenatal genetic screening recommendations and to identify recurrent themes. ?, nonparametric tests, and logistic regression were used to determine the effects of discussion elements on screening decisions. Qualitative analysis was performed for genetic screening content.The study included 210 patients and 45 health care providers. Health care providers offered genetic screening at 90% of visits; 78% of women chose genetic screening. Few conversations (1.5%) included all College-recommended topics. Inclusion of College-recommended topics did not affect women's screening choices. Conversations about screening for fetal aneuploidy lasted 1.5 minutes on average (range 0.12-7.05 minutes). Recurrent themes identified included clarifying that screening results are not diagnostic (51% of conversations), emphasizing that screening is a personal choice (45% of conversations), and discussing how a woman might use genetic screening results to guide decisions about diagnostic testing or termination (37% of conversations). Health care providers described screening results as "high or low risk" in 67% of conversations discussing risk and quantitatively (ie, 1 in 100 [1%]) in 33%.Although the majority of patients were offered and underwent screening, most health care providers' counseling did not adhere to College recommendations.
| S-EPMC4879044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically changed the US health care system, causing an influx of patients who require resources. Many oncologists are having challenging conversations with their patients about how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting cancer care and may desire evidence-based communication guidance.ObjectivesTo identify the clinical scenarios that pose communication challenges, understand patient reactions to these scenarios, and develop a communication guide with sample responses.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study that was conducted at a single Midwestern academic medical center invited physicians to respond to a brief semistructured interview by email or telephone and then disseminated an anonymous online survey among patients with cancer. Oncology-specific, COVID-19-related clinical scenarios were identified by the physicians, and potential reactions to these scenarios were gleaned from the patient responses to the survey. Health communication experts were invited to participate in the iterative development of a communication guide, comprising 3 essential communication principles and strategies and informed by insights from physicians and patients. This study was conducted from March 25, 2020, to April 2, 2020.InterventionsExpert review, interviews, and surveys assessing challenging situations specific to cancer management during the COVID-19 pandemic.Main outcomes and measuresOncology-specific, COVID-19-related clinical scenarios from physician interviews; responses to each scenario from patient surveys; and applicable communication principles from health communication expert literature review.ResultsOf the 8 physicians who participated in interviews, 4 were men (50%) and 4 were women (50%). These physicians represented the following disciplines: internal medicine (n = 1), hematology/oncology (n = 2), radiation oncology (n = 3), and surgical oncology (n = 2). Their disease site specialization included cancers of the breast, head and neck, melanoma, and gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts. A total of 48 patients with cancer completed the online survey; no demographic information was collected from the patients. The physicians identified 8 oncology-specific, COVID-19-related scenarios in which communication might be challenging: (1) worse outcomes from COVID-19, (2) delay in cancer screening, (3) delay in diagnostic workup, (4) delay in initiation of treatment, (5) offer of nonstandard treatment, (6) treatment breaks, (7) delay in follow-up imaging or care, and (8) inability to be admitted into the hospital for management. Potential patient reactions to each of these scenarios were compiled from survey responses. For most scenarios, patient reactions involved anger, fear, and anxiety (eg, "I'm scared"; "This isn't fair. I am upset."). These emotional patient responses informed the selection of the 3 general communication principles, which suggested language and strategies that physicians can use to respond to patients.Conclusions and relevanceIn this qualitative study, physicians and patients identified communication needs used by health communication experts to inform the development of a practical, evidence-based communication guide for oncology care during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC7411932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Across North America, the opioid overdose epidemic is leading to increasing hospitalizations of people who use drugs (PWUD). However, hospitals are ill-prepared to meet the needs of PWUD. We focus on illicit drug use while admitted to hospital and how PWUD and health care providers describe, respond, and attempt to manage its use. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Using varied purposive methods in Toronto and Ottawa, we recruited n = 24 PWUD (who self-reported that they were living with HIV and/or HCV infection; currently or had previously used drugs or alcohol in ways that were harmful; had a hospital admission in the past five years) and n = 26 health care providers (who were: currently working in an academic hospital as a physician, nurse, social worker or other allied health professional; and 2) providing care to this patient group). All n = 50 participants completed a short, socio-demographic questionnaire and an audio-recorded semi-structured interview about receiving or providing acute care in a hospital between 04/2014 and 05/2015. Patient participants received $25 CAD and return transit fare; provider participants received a $50 CAD gift card for a bookseller. All participants provided informed consent. Audio-recordings were transcribed verbatim, corrected, and uploaded to NVivo 10. Using the seven-step framework method, transcripts were coded line-by-line and managed using NVvivo. An analytic framework was created by grouping and mapping the codes. Preliminary analyses were presented to advisory group members for comment and used to refine the interpretation. Questionnaire data were managed using SPSS version 22.0 and descriptive statistics were used to describe the participants. Many but not all patient participants spoke about using psycho-active substances not prescribed to them during a hospital admission. Attempts to avoid negative experiences (e.g., withdrawal, boredom, sadness, loneliness and/or untreated pain) were cited as reasons for illicit drug use. Most tried to conceal their illicit drug use from health care providers. Patients described how their self-reported level of pain was not always believed, tolerance to opioids was ignored, and requests for higher doses of pain medications denied. Some health care providers were unaware of on-site illicit drug use; others acknowledged it occurred. Few could identify a hospital policy specific to illicit drug use and most used their personal beliefs to guide their responses to it (e.g., ignore it, increase surveillance of patients, reprimands, loss of privileges/medications, threats of immediate discharge should it continue, and substitution dosing of medication). CONCLUSIONS:Providers highlighted gaps in institutional guidance for how they ought to appropriately respond to in-hospital substance use. Patients attempted to conceal illicit drug use in environments with no institutional policies about such use, leading to varied responses that were inconsistent with the principles of patient centred care and reflected personal beliefs about illicit drug use. There are increasing calls for implementation of harm reduction approaches and interventions in hospitals but uptake has been slow. Our study contributes to this emerging body of literature and highlights areas for future research, the development of interventions, and changes to policy and practice.
| S-EPMC7058273 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Successful coordination of specialty care requires understanding the perspectives of patients, primary care providers, and specialists-that is, the specialty care "triad." This study used qualitative methods to compare these perspectives in an integrated health care system, using diabetes specialty care as an exemplar. Primary care providers and endocrinologists relied on interclinician relationships to coordinate care. Clinicians rarely included patients or other staff in their conceptualization of specialty care coordination. Patients often assumed responsibility for specialty care coordination but struggled to succeed. We identified several opportunities to improve coordination across the triad. In an integrated medical system, the shared organizational structure can facilitate these efforts.
| S-EPMC5726433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As elective surgery slowly reopens across the country, it is paramount that surgeons recognize and take responsibility for their roles in protecting patient safety during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Namely, these include (1) to prevent further spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV-2 virus, (2) to understand the shift in injuries that has occurred as a result of altered lifestyles led by our patients, and (3) to leverage our platforms to disseminate information regarding how individuals can maintain musculoskeletal health during the pandemic. Efforts taken to reduce the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV-2 virus can be focused on 3 broad categories of provider-patient interaction: preoperative and clinic visits, surgical encounters, and postoperative care.
| S-EPMC7508518 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveIn the present study, we quantified the effect of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on the volume of adult and pediatric neurosurgical procedures, inpatient consultations, and clinic visits at an academic medical center.MethodsNeurosurgical procedures, inpatient consultations, and outpatient appointments at Vanderbilt University Medical Center were identified from March 23, 2020 through May 8, 2020 (during COVID-19) and March 25, 2019 through May 10, 2019 (before COVID-19). The neurosurgical volume was compared between the 2 periods.ResultsA 40% reduction in weekly procedural volume was demonstrated during COVID-19 (median before, 75; interquartile range [IQR], 72-80; median during, 45; IQR, 43-47; P < 0.001). A 42% reduction occurred in weekly adult procedures (median before, 62; IQR, 54-70; median during, 36; IQR, 34-39; P < 0.001), and a 31% reduction occurred in weekly pediatric procedures (median before, 13; IQR, 12-14; median during, 9; IQR, 8-10; P = 0.004). Among adult procedures, the most significant decreases were seen for spine (P < 0.001) and endovascular (P < 0.001) procedures and cranioplasty (P < 0.001). A significant change was not found in the adult open vascular (P = 0.291), functional (P = 0.263), cranial tumor (P = 0.143), or hydrocephalus (P = 0.173) procedural volume. Weekly inpatient consultations to neurosurgery decreased by 24% (median before, 99; IQR, 94-114; median during, 75; IQR, 68-84; P = 0.008) for adults. Weekly in-person adult and pediatric outpatient clinic visits witnessed a 91% decrease (median before, 329; IQR, 326-374; median during, 29; IQR, 26-39; P < 0.001). In contrast, weekly telehealth encounters increased from a median of 0 (IQR, 0-0) before to a median of 151 (IQR, 126-156) during COVID-19 (P < 0.001).ConclusionsSignificant reductions occurred in neurosurgical operations, clinic visits, and inpatient consultations during COVID-19. Telehealth was increasingly used for assessments. The long-term effects of the reduced neurosurgical volume and increased telehealth usage on patient outcomes should be explored.
| S-EPMC7319935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study was to identify miRNAs that were dysregulated after the onset of COVID-19 and thus potentially be used for risk stratification (i.e., mortality). Therefore, we conducted a multi-center, retrospective longitudinal cohort study enrolling 142 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who presented to two Canadian hospitals from May 2020 – December 2020 along with a cohort of 27 SARS-CoV-2 patients with mild upper respiratory tract symptoms and 69 SARS-CoV-2-negative patients from the ICU. Blood was biobanked from SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in the emergency department (mild), ward (moderate) or intensive care unit (severe). Assessment of miRNA expression and co-regulatory network generation revealed significant transcriptome dyregulation in pateints with severe COVID-19 that was largely different from SARS-CoV-2 negative patients in the ICU.
2022-04-08 | GSE178246 | GEO
Project description:Zika virus transmission within and between the Americas is of global concern. This study assessed knowledge about the Zika virus among pregnant women in the United States, their travel plans to endemic areas, and whether their health care providers discussed Zika with them. This cross-sectional study used data from 492 pregnant women (18-50 years) from an online survey conducted from April 8 to July 27, 2016. Pregnant women were recruited online through Facebook, Twitter, Craigslist, and Reddit. Almost all (97.8%) participants had heard of the Zika virus, of which 71% first learned about it from the internet. Over one third of these pregnant women reported that their health providers discussed transmission of the Zika virus with them. Most respondents reported that their providers had discussed risks related to travelling to areas with Zika outbreaks. Half of the survey respondents reported that their providers gave them information about avoiding mosquito bites. Pregnant women were not concerned about Zika affecting their own health, but 34% were very or extremely concerned about it affecting their babies' health. Almost no pregnant women currently had travel plans to areas with ongoing Zika transmissions, and of the 14% who previously had plans, most (85%) cancelled their travel due to concerns about Zika. Overall, pregnant women in our sample were highly knowledgeable about Zika virus. Over one third of women received suggestions regarding prevention of Zika from their healthcare providers.
| S-EPMC5447381 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The National Essential Medicine System (NEMS) is a new policy launched by the Chinese government in 2009. The effects of its introduction have been widely investigated. However, little research has focused on individual patients' perspectives. The purpose of this study was to examine current understanding and opinions of China's NEMS of primary care providers (PCPs) and patients.Providers (n?=?134) and patients (n?=?175) were examined based on self-completed questionnaire surveys conducted in 16 primary healthcare centers in Ningxia, northwestern China. Questions addressed the topics of: participants' socio-demographic characteristics; awareness of NEMS policies; perceptions of NEMS-related changes; satisfactions with NEMS.The patients had a low awareness of NEMS while a majority of providers were familiar with NEMS. All participants were satisfied with the price and quality of essential medicines, but not satisfied with the quantity. Patients felt there had been a decrease in their total medical expenses per visit and improved pharmaceutical services. Most providers perceived no change in their personal or departmental income. The overall satisfaction rate related to NEMS among providers and patients was 92.54 and 93.31%, respectively. Overall there was a link between knowledge about NEMS and satisfaction with the program: patients who had greater knowledge of reimbursement policy, and the providers with greater knowledge of NEMS, reported higher satisfaction.The findings revealed a high level of satisfaction towards NEMS among primary care providers and patients, which is a reflection of the improvements in the health care system. However, some patients' low awareness of NEMS should be paid attention to, as it could reduce their knowledge of essential medicines and hinder the full potential of NEMS.
| S-EPMC4729152 | biostudies-literature