Dataset Information

Provider Perceptions of Virtual Care During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Multispecialty Survey Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The 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.

Objective

The objective of this study was to assess provider perceptions of the quality, efficiency, and challenges of VC versus in-person care with masks.

Design

This was a voluntary survey.

Participants

Mental health (MH), primary care, medical specialty, and surgical specialty providers across the 8 VA New England Healthcare System medical centers.

Measures

Provider 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.

Results

The 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).

Conclusions

Broad 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.

SUBMITTER: Connolly SL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8191369 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundVirtual reality (VR), a simulated experience that can be similar to or completely different from the real world, has become increasingly useful within the psychiatric and medical fields. This VR technology has been applied in medical school trainings, exposure therapy for individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and reminiscence therapy associated with mood disorders for older adults. Perceptions of VR through the lens of the health care provider require further exploration. VR has grown in popularity; however, this modality continues to be underused in most Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals.ObjectiveA web-based survey was used to explore health care provider perceptions of immersive VR availability and use for older adults and identify potential barriers for immersive VR use in older adults with cognitive impairment.MethodsAn 8-item web-based survey was developed to obtain health care provider feedback. This survey was disseminated throughout a single Veterans Integrated Services Network (VISN). The VR survey was developed via the Survey Monkey platform and distributed through the secure VA email network. Providers were asked to voluntarily participate in the brief, anonymous survey and offer their perceptions of immersive VR use within their patient population. Survey data were reviewed and interpreted using descriptive statistics.ResultsA total of 49 respondents completed the survey over a 15-day period. Of them, 36 respondents (73%) had heard of a VR device, though the majority (n=44, 90%) had never used or prescribed a VR device. Respondents identified several potential barriers to immersive VR use in older adults with cognitive impairment (eg, hearing difficulties, perceptions of technology, cognitive concerns, access to resources, and visual impairment). Despite the barriers identified, providers (n=48, 98%) still reported that they would feel comfortable prescribing immersive VR as an intervention for their patient population.ConclusionsSurvey findings revealed that health care providers within this VISN for VAs have heard of VR, although they may not have actively engaged in its use. Most of the providers reported that they would prescribe the use of an immersive VR intervention for their older adult patients. This key point highlights the desire to implement VR strategies for patient use by their providers. If underlying barriers can be addressed and relatively resolved, this technological intervention has the potential to create substantial breakthroughs in clinical care.

Project description:BackgroundHeart failure (HF) patients with CRT devices are a vulnerable patient population during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic. It is important to develop innovative virtual care models to deliver multidisciplinary care while minimizing the risk of SARS-CoV2 exposure.ObjectiveWe aim to provide a description of how HF patients with CRT devices were assessed and managed in our virtual multidisciplinary clinic during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Clinical outcomes between this group of patients seen in virtual clinic and a historical cohort followed by in-person multi-disciplinary clinic prior to the pandemic were compared.MethodThis is a retrospective cohort study of HF patients with CRT implants who were seen in the virtual multidisciplinary clinic from March 18th, 2020 to May 27th, 2020 (Virtual Visit Group, N = 43). A historical cohort of HF patients with CRT devices seen in the ReACT clinic in person during the same calendar time period in 2019 was used as a control group (In-Person Visit Group, N = 39). Both groups were followed until July 1st of the same calendar year (2020 or 2019) for clinical events. The primary outcome measure was a combined outcome of all-cause mortality and HF- or device-related hospitalizations during follow-up. The secondary outcome measures included patient satisfaction, COVID-19 infection, and other cardiovascular events.ResultsIn the Virtual-Visit Group, 21 patients (48.8%) had their initial ReACT clinic visit (first visit after CRT implant) as a virtual visit; 22 patients (51.2%) had prior in-person ReACT clinic visits before the first virtual visit. During the virtual visits, 12 patients had either potential cardiac symptoms or significant device interrogation findings that required clinical intervention. In post-virtual clinic patient satisfaction survey, all 22 patients surveyed (100%) reported being very satisfied or satisfied with the overall experience of the virtual clinic, and every patient (100%) said they would like to use telemedicine again. During a median follow-up period of 82 days (interquartile range [IQR] 61-96 days), one patient died from pneumonia of unclear etiology at an outside hospital, without documentation of COVID-19 positivity. No patient was hospitalized for HF- or arrhythmia-related complications. No patient was diagnosed with COVID-19. Compared with the In-Person Visit Group, there was no significant increase in mortality or major cardiovascular events in the Virtual-Visit Group (2.3% versus 5.1%, P = 0.60).Conclusions and relevanceVirtual multidisciplinary care was feasible for HF patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices and achieved good patient satisfaction. Virtual care was not associated with short-term increase in adverse events for HF patients with CRT device during the COVID-19 Pandemic. This virtual care model could help promote the adoption of digital health methodology for high-risk patients with multiple cardiac comorbidities.

Project description:The current Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted and changed lives on a global scale since its emergence and spread from China in late 2019. It has caused millions of infections, and thousands of deaths worldwide. However, the control of this pandemic still remains unachievable in many African countries including Egypt and Nigeria, despite the application of some strict preventive and control measures. Therefore, this study assessed the knowledge, attitude, and perceptions of Egyptians and Nigerians towards the COVID-19 pandemic. This study was designed as a cross-sectional community-based questionnaire survey in both countries. Participants' demography, knowledge, attitude, and perceptions towards the COVID-19 outbreak were obtained using a convenience sampling technique. Data collected were subjected to descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis. A total of 1437 respondents were included in this preliminary report. The mean knowledge score was 14.7±2.3. The majority of the respondents (61.6%) had a satisfactory knowledge of the disease. Age (18-39 years), education (College/bachelors), and background of respondents were factors influencing knowledge levels. The attitude of most respondents (68.9%) towards instituted preventive measures was satisfactory with an average attitude score of 6.9 ± 1.2. The majority of the respondents (96%) practiced self-isolation and social-distancing but only 36% follow all health recommendations. The perception of most respondents (62.1%) on the global efforts at controlling the virus and preventing further spread was satisfactory with an average score of 10.9 ± 2.7. Only 22% of the respondents were satisfied with their country's handling of the pandemic. An apprehensive understanding of the current status in Africa through studies like KAP is crucial to avoid Africa being the next epicenter of the pandemic. For the populace to follow standard infection prevention and control measures adequately, governments need to gain the trust of citizens by strengthening the health systems and improving surveillance activities in detecting cases, to offer the optimum health services to their communities.

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.

Project description:BackgroundThere has been a surge in coronavirus disease 2019 admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) in Asia-Pacific countries. Because ICU healthcare workers are exposed to aerosol-generating procedures, ensuring optimal personal protective equipment (PPE) preparedness is important.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to evaluate PPE preparedness across ICUs in six Asia-Pacific countries during the initial phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, which is defined by the World Health Organization as guideline adherence, training healthcare workers, procuring stocks, and responding appropriately to suspected cases.MethodsA cross-sectional Web-based survey was circulated to 633 level II/III ICUs of Australia, New Zealand (NZ), Singapore, Hong Kong (HK), India, and the Philippines.FindingsTwo hundred sixty-three intensivists responded, representing 231 individual ICUs eligible for analysis. Response rates were 68-100% in all countries except India, where it was 24%. Ninety-seven percent of ICUs either conformed to or exceeded World Health Organization recommendations for PPE practice. Fifty-nine percent ICUs used airborne precautions irrespective of aerosol generation procedures. There were variations in negative-pressure room use (highest in HK/Singapore), training (best in NZ), and PPE stock awareness (best in HK/Singapore/NZ). High-flow nasal oxygenation and noninvasive ventilation were not options in most HK (66.7% and 83.3%, respectively) and Singapore ICUs (50% and 80%, respectively), but were considered in other countries to a greater extent. Thirty-eight percent ICUs reported not having specialised airway teams. Showering and "buddy systems" were underused. Clinical waste disposal training was suboptimal (38%).ConclusionsMany ICUs in the Asia-Pacific reported suboptimal PPE preparedness in several domains, particularly related to PPE training, practice, and stock awareness, which requires remediation. Adoption of low-cost approaches such as buddy systems should be encouraged. The complete avoidance of high-flow nasal oxygenation reported by several intensivists needs reconsideration. Consideration must be given to standardise PPE guidelines to minimise practice variations. Urgent research to evaluate PPE preparedness and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission is required.

Project description:BackgroundBrazil has been disproportionately affected by COVID-19, placing a high burden on ICUs.Research questionAre perceptions of ICU resource availability associated with end-of-life decisions and burnout among health care providers (HCPs) during COVID-19 surges in Brazil?Study design and methodsWe electronically administered a survey to multidisciplinary ICU HCPs during two 2-week periods (in June 2020 and March 2021) coinciding with COVID-19 surges. We examined responses across geographical regions and performed multivariate regressions to explore factors associated with reports of: (1) families being allowed less input in decisions about maintaining life-sustaining treatments for patients with COVID-19 and (2) emotional distress and burnout.ResultsWe included 1,985 respondents (57% physicians, 14% nurses, 12% respiratory therapists, 16% other HCPs). More respondents reported shortages during the second surge compared with the first (P < .05 for all comparisons), including lower availability of intensivists (66% vs 42%), ICU nurses (53% vs 36%), ICU beds (68% vs 22%), and ventilators for patients with COVID-19 (80% vs 70%); shortages were highest in the North. One-quarter of HCPs reported that families were allowed less input in decisions about maintaining life-sustaining treatments for patients with COVID-19, which was associated with lack of intensivists (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.37; 95% CI, 1.05-1.80) and ICU beds (aRR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.16-2.62) during the first surge and lack of N95 masks (aRR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.10-1.85), noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (aRR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.18-2.07), and oxygen concentrators (aRR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.13-2.00) during the second surge. Burnout was higher during the second surge (60% vs 71%; P < .001), associated with witnessing colleagues at one's hospital contract COVID-19 during both surges (aRR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.25-1.93] and 1.31 [95% CI, 1.11-1.55], respectively), as well as worries about finances (aRR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.02-1.61) and lack of ICU nurses (aRR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.02-1.53) during the first surge.InterpretationDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, ICU HCPs in Brazil experienced substantial resource shortages, health care disparities between regions, changes in end-of-life care associated with resource shortages, and high proportions of burnout.