Dataset Information

Patient perceptions of surgical telehealth consultations during the COVID 19 pandemic in Australia: Lessons for future implementation.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Prior studies of telehealth report high levels of patient satisfaction, but within carefully selected clinical scenarios. The COVID-19 pandemic led to telehealth replacing face-to-face care for many surgical consultations across a variety of situations. More evidence is needed regarding patient perceptions of telehealth in surgery, in particular, exploring barriers and facilitators associated with its sustained implementation beyond the pandemic.

Methods

Survey invitations were emailed to a convenience sample of surgical patients by their surgeon following a telehealth consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Surgeons were recruited from a sample (n = 683) who completed a survey on telehealth (distributed via email to all Australian Fellows of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons). Mixed methods analysis was performed of the patient survey data.

Results

A total of 1166 consultations were captured: 50% routine reviews, 17% initial appointments and 20% post-operative reviews. Video-link was used in 49% of consultations. The majority of patients (94%), were satisfied with the quality of their surgical telehealth consultation and 75% felt it delivered the same level of care as face-to-face encounters. Telehealth was convenient to use (96%) and led to cost savings for 60% of patients. When asked about future appointment preferences after the pandemic, 41% indicated they would prefer telehealth (24% video-link and 17% telephone) over face-to-face appointments. There was a perception by patients that telehealth consultation fees should be less than face-to-face consultation fees.

Conclusion

Patient satisfaction with surgical telehealth consultations is high. Barriers to more widespread implementation include financial, clinical appropriateness, technical and confidentiality concerns.

SUBMITTER: Wiadji E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8420414 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding perceptions of telehealth implementation from patients and providers can improve the utility and sustainability of these programs, particularly in under-resourced rural settings. The purpose of this study was to evaluate both patient and provider perceptions of telehealth visits in a large rural healthcare system during the COVID-19 pandemic. To promote sustainability of telehealth approaches, we also assessed whether the percentage of missed appointments differed between in-person and telehealth visits.MethodsUsing anonymous surveys, we evaluated patient preferences and satisfaction with telehealth visits from November 2020 -March 2021 and assessed perceptions of telehealth efficiency and value among rural providers from September-October 2020. We examined whether telehealth perceptions differed according to patients' age, educational attainment, insurance status, and distance to clinical site and providers' age and length of time practicing medicine using ANOVA test. We also examined whether the percentage of missed appointments differed between in-person and telehealth visits at a family practice clinic within the rural healthcare system from April to September 2020 using a Chi-square test.ResultsOver 73% of rural patients had favorable perceptions of telehealth visits, and satisfaction was generally higher among younger patients. Patients reported difficulty with scheduling follow-up appointments, lack of personal contact and technology challenges as common barriers. Over 80% of the 219 providers responding to the survey reported that telehealth added value to their practice, while 36.6% agreed that telehealth visits are more efficient than in-person visits. Perception of telehealth value and efficiency did not differ by provider age (p = 0.67 and p = 0.67, respectively) or time in practice (p = 0.53 and p = 0.44, respectively). Technology challenges for the patient (91.3%) and provider (45.1%) were commonly reported. The percentage of missed appointments was slightly higher for telehealth visits compared to in-person visits, but the difference was not statistically significant (8.7% vs. 8.0%; p = 0.39).ConclusionsTelehealth perceptions were generally favorable among rural patients and providers, although satisfaction was lower among older patients and providers. Our findings suggest that telehealth approaches may add value and efficiency to rural clinical practice. However, technology issues for both patients and providers and gaps in care coordination need to be addressed to promote sustainability of telehealth approaches in rural practice.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the first COVID-19 pandemic 'lockdown' in Aotearoa/New Zealand (March-May 2020, in which strict 'stay at home' measures were introduced), general practices were advised to use telephone and video consultations (telehealth) wherever possible instead of the usual in-person visits. This was a sudden change for most practices and patients. This research aimed to explore how patients accessed general practice during lockdown and evaluate their experiences with telehealth, to inform how telehealth could be most effectively used in the future.MethodsUsing a mixed-method approach, we undertook an online survey and in-depth interviews with adults (> 18 years) who had contact with practices during lockdown, recruited through social media and email lists. We present descriptive statistics from the survey data (n = 1010) and qualitative analysis of interview data (n = 38) and open-ended survey questions, using a framework of access to health care, from the patient's perspective.ResultsIn general, patients reported high satisfaction with telehealth in general practice during lockdown. Telehealth was convenient and allowed patients to safely access health care without having to weigh-up the fear of COVID-19 infection against the need to be seen. Telehealth worked best for routine and familiar health issues and when rapport was established between patients and clinicians. This was easier with a pre-existing clinical relationship, but not impossible without one. Telehealth was less suitable when a physical examination was needed, when the diagnosis was unknown or for patients who had a strong preference to be seen in-person.ConclusionsEven in this disruptive lockdown period, that prompted an unexpected and rapid implementation of telehealth services in general practices, most patients had positive experiences with telehealth. In the future, patients want the choice of consultation type to match their needs, circumstances, and preferences. Technological issues and funding barriers may need to be addressed, and clear communication for both patients and clinicians is needed about key aspects of telehealth (e.g. cost, appropriateness, privacy). Maintaining telehealth as an option post-lockdown has the potential to increase timely and safe access to primary health care for many patients.

Project description:BackgroundOutpatient clinics were shifted rapidly to telehealth in Australia during the Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic, drastically altering patient care and experience.AimsTo investigate patient satisfaction and acceptability of telehealth consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsProspective observation study conducted in two hospital rheumatology outpatient departments (OPD) undertaking telehealth consultations during COVID-19. A modified version of a validated telehealth evaluation survey was posted to all patients attending the telehealth OPD rheumatology clinics, including balanced 5-point Likert scales and free-text responses. Cluster analysis was applied to the Likert-scale questions, alongside thematic analysis of free-text responses.ResultsThere were 128 respondents (29% response rate), of which 69.5% were women and the majority (87.5%) was aged 50 years or older. All telehealth consultations were conducted by telephone. Nearly one-fifth of patients indicated consistent dissatisfaction with telehealth across the range of questions. These patients were older, reported lower educational qualifications and lower health literacy scores and lacked access to the Internet. While many patients found this mode of consultation to be convenient, patients expressed concerns regarding absence of physical examination. A recurrent theme was a desire for a mixed-model clinic in the future, with flexibility of having both telehealth and face-to-face consultations.ConclusionsThis study offers unique insights into patients' experiences with telehealth, which until the current global pandemic, has been an uncommon mode of consultation delivery in urban areas. This study suggests when defining the place of telehealth in future healthcare delivery, patient perspective and careful patient selection will be key. Disease progression, language and cognitive ability, health literacy, technology access and patient and clinician preference are important considerations when deciding how effectively to embed and integrate telehealth into consultations.

Project description:2018 marks the 100-year anniversary of the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed ~50 million people worldwide. The severity of this pandemic resulted from a complex interplay between viral, host, and societal factors. Here, we review the viral, genetic and immune factors that contributed to the severity of the 1918 pandemic and discuss the implications for modern pandemic preparedness. We address unresolved questions of why the 1918 influenza H1N1 virus was more virulent than other influenza pandemics and why some people survived the 1918 pandemic and others succumbed to the infection. While current studies suggest that viral factors such as haemagglutinin and polymerase gene segments most likely contributed to a potent, dysregulated pro-inflammatory cytokine storm in victims of the pandemic, a shift in case-fatality for the 1918 pandemic toward young adults was most likely associated with the host's immune status. Lack of pre-existing virus-specific and/or cross-reactive antibodies and cellular immunity in children and young adults likely contributed to the high attack rate and rapid spread of the 1918 H1N1 virus. In contrast, lower mortality rate in in the older (>30 years) adult population points toward the beneficial effects of pre-existing cross-reactive immunity. In addition to the role of humoral and cellular immunity, there is a growing body of evidence to suggest that individual genetic differences, especially involving single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), contribute to differences in the severity of influenza virus infections. Co-infections with bacterial pathogens, and possibly measles and malaria, co-morbidities, malnutrition or obesity are also known to affect the severity of influenza disease, and likely influenced 1918 H1N1 disease severity and outcomes. Additionally, we also discuss the new challenges, such as changing population demographics, antibiotic resistance and climate change, which we will face in the context of any future influenza virus pandemic. In the last decade there has been a dramatic increase in the number of severe influenza virus strains entering the human population from animal reservoirs (including highly pathogenic H7N9 and H5N1 viruses). An understanding of past influenza virus pandemics and the lessons that we have learnt from them has therefore never been more pertinent.

Project description:ImportanceInpatient subspecialty consultations, a common and expensive practice within inpatient medicine, do not always go well; however, little is known about the failure modes of consultation, thus making it difficult to identify interventions to improve consultation quality.ObjectiveTo understand how stakeholders envision the ideal inpatient consultation and identify how and why consultations commonly fall short of this ideal.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study used in-depth, semistructured interviews collected from April to October 2017 and analyzed from January 2018 to February 2020 using conventional content analysis. The setting was a single academic medical center in Boston, Massachusetts. Participants were hospitalists and specialists who had requested or performed a consultation for a non-intensive care unit patient in the previous 4 months, patients who had received a consultation while hospitalized at the medical center in the previous 15 months, and family members of such patients.Main outcomes and measuresConsultation experiences reported by participants. Clinicians were asked about characteristics of the ideal consultation, positive and negative consultation experiences, costs and benefits, and suggested improvements. Patients and family members were asked about their consultation experience, changes in care, communication preferences, and suggested improvements.ResultsThe study included 38 participants: 17 specialists, 13 hospitalists, 4 patients, and 4 family members. More than half (21 of 38) of the participants were female. There were 11 key information exchanges identified that occur among the specialist team, primary team, and patient/family during an ideal consultation. These exchanges are time sensitive and primarily carried out through unwritten protocols. We also identified 6 defects (process failures) that commonly derail information exchanges (complete omission, exclusion of a key stakeholder, poor timing, incomplete or inaccurate information, and misinterpretation) and 5 contextual factors (roles and boundaries, professionalism, team hierarchy, availability, and operational know-how) that influence how information exchange unfolds, making some consultations more prone to defects.Conclusions and relevanceSuccessful inpatient consultation requires a complicated, sequenced series of time-sensitive information exchanges that are highly vulnerable to failure. Maximizing the benefit of consultations will likely entail not only minimizing low-value consultations but also actively preventing defects, such as information inaccuracies and misinterpretation, that commonly derail the consultation process.

Project description:ImportanceWhile telehealth use in surgery has shown to be feasible, telehealth became a major modality of health care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectiveTo assess patterns of telehealth use across surgical specialties before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsInsurance claims from a Michigan statewide commercial payer for new patient visits with a surgeon from 1 of 9 surgical specialties during one of the following periods: prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (period 1: January 5 to March 7, 2020), early pandemic (period 2: March 8 to June 6, 2020), and late pandemic (period 3: June 7 to September 5, 2020).ExposuresTelehealth implementation owing to the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020.Main outcomes and measures(1) Conversion rate defined as the rate of weekly new patient telehealth visits divided by mean weekly number of total new patient visits in 2019. This outcome adjusts for a substantial decrease in outpatient care during the pandemic. (2) Weekly number of new patient telehealth visits divided by weekly number of total new patient visits.ResultsAmong 4405 surgeons in the cohort, 2588 (58.8%) performed telehealth in any patient care context. Specifically for new patient visits, 1182 surgeons (26.8%) used telehealth. A total of 109 610 surgical new outpatient visits were identified during the pandemic. The median (interquartile range) age of telehealth patients was 46.8 (34.1-58.4) years compared with 52.6 (38.3-62.3) years for patients who received care in-person. Prior to March 2020, less than 1% (8 of 173 939) of new patient visits were conducted through telehealth. Telehealth use peaked in April 2020 (week 14) and facilitated 34.6% (479 of 1383) of all new patient visits during that week. The telehealth conversion rate peaked in April 2020 (week 15) and was equal to 8.2% of the 2019 mean weekly new patient visit volume. During period 2, a mean (SD) of 16.6% (12.0%) of all new patient surgical visits were conducted via telehealth (conversion rate of 5.1% of 2019 mean weekly new patient visit volumes). During period 3, 3.0% (2168 of 71 819) of all new patient surgical visits were conducted via telehealth (conversion rate of 2.5% of 2019 new patient visit volumes). Mean (SD) telehealth conversion rates varied by specialty with urology being the highest (14.3% [7.7%]).Conclusions and relevanceResults from this study showed that telehealth use grew across all surgical specialties in Michigan in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. While rates of telehealth use have declined as in-person care has resumed, telehealth use remains substantially higher across all surgical specialties than it was prior to the pandemic.