Patient and family experience of telehealth care delivery as part of the CF chronic care model early in the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
During the COVID-19 pandemic, CF centers shifted to a telehealth delivery model. Our study aimed to determine how people with CF (PwCF) and their families experienced telehealth and assessed its quality and acceptability for future CF care.Methods
The CF Patient and Family State of Care Survey (PFSoC) was fielded from August 31-October 30, 2020. The PFSoC explored themes of overall telehealth quality, ease of use, desirability, and preference for a future mix of in-person and telehealth care. Demographic covariates considered included: gender, age, CFTR modulator status, and region of residence.Results
424 PwCF and parents of PwCF responded (47% parents). Most (81%) reported a telehealth visit which included a MD/APP and nurse team members. 91% found telehealth easy to use, and 66% reported similar/higher quality than in-person care. One-third (34%) reported the highest desire for future telehealth care, with 45% (n =212) desiring 50% or more of visits conducted via telehealth. Adults were more likely than parents to report highest desire for future telehealth (64% vs. 36%). Respondents who perceived telehealth as similar/higher quality were more likely to desire future telehealth compared to those who perceived telehealth as lower quality (96% vs. 50%). Mixed methods analysis revealed themes affecting perceptions of telehealth.Conclusions
PwCF desire for future telehealth was influenced by perception of quality and age. Several themes emerged that need to be explored as telehealth is adapted into the CF chronic care model, especially when thinking about integration into pediatric care.
SUBMITTER: Solomon GM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8683126 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeTo assess the initial utilization, safety, and patient experience with tele-ophthalmology during the COVID-19 pandemic.DesignCross-sectional study.MethodsWe conducted a telephone survey and interview of a random sample of patients who received different modalities of care (in-person, telephone, videocall, or visits deferred) during Michigan's shelter-in-place order beginning March 23, 2020. The survey assessed patient safety, patient satisfaction with care, perceptions of telehealth-based eye care, and worry about eyesight. Data were analyzed via frequency measures (eg, means and standard deviations), χ2 tests, ANOVA, and paired t tests. Interviews were analyzed using grounded theory.ResultsA total of 3,274 patients were called and 1,720 (53%) agreed to participate. In-person participants were significantly older than telephone (P = .002) and videocall visit (P = .001) participants. Significantly more white participants had in-person visits than minority participants (P = .002). In-person visit participants worried about their eyesight more (2.7, standard deviation [SD] = 1.2) than those who had telephone (2.5, SD = 1.3), videocall (2.4, SD = 1.1), or deferred visits (2.4, SD = 1.2) (P = .004). Of all telephone or videocall visits, 1.5% (n = 26) resulted in an in-person visit within 1 day, 2.9% (n = 48) within 2-7 days, and 2.4% (n = 40) within 8-14 days after the virtual visit demonstrating appropriate triage to telemedicine-based care. Patients frequently cited a desire for augmenting the telephone or videocall visits with objective test data.ConclusionsWhen appropriately triaged, tele-ophthalmology appears to be a safe way to reduce the volume of in-person visits to promote social distancing in the clinic. A hybrid model of eye care combining ancillary testing with a video or phone visit represents a promising model of care.
| S-EPMC8087573 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCystic Fibrosis (CF) is a chronic multi-system disease best cared for at Care centers with routine monitoring by interdisciplinary teams. Previously, remote home monitoring technology has been explored to augment in-person care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, traditional in-person care was limited and CF centers rapidly adapted to a telehealth delivery model. The purpose of this study was to understand how people with CF (PwCF) and families of PwCF experienced the shift to telehealthcare delivery.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional survey-based study conducted in 11 CF Centers. Two surveys were designed (one for adult PwCF and one for parents/guardians of PwCF) by participating CF center members with patient and family partner input. Surveys were disseminated electronically via email/text to all patients who completed a telehealth visit, and data were collected on secure Google Forms.ResultsRespondents rated their telehealth experiences as positive. Most were highly satisfied with their telehealth visit (77% adult, 72% pediatric) and found the visits to be highly convenient (85% for all surveyed). A majority of patients reported they had adequate time during the visit and had all questions and concerns addressed. Importantly, we also identified concerns regarding lack of in-person assessments including pulmonary function testing (PFT) and throat/sputum culture.ConclusionTelehealth was a feasible and well-accepted mechanism for delivering care in a chronic CF care model during the COVID-19 pandemic and may be useful in the post-pandemic era. Further work is needed to understand the impact of telehealth on patient outcomes, healthcare utilization and associated cost.
| S-EPMC7997421 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate patient-reported experiences of telehealth and disparities in access, use, and satisfaction with telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic.Materials and methodsWe examined data from the fifth wave of the COVID-19 & Chronic Conditions (C3) study conducted between December 2020 and March 2021.ResultsOf the 718 participants, 342 (47.6%) reported having a telehealth visit within the past 4 months. Participants who had a recent telehealth visit were younger, reported worse overall health and chronic illness burden, and living below poverty level. Among participants who had a telehealth visit, 66.7% reported telephone visits and most participants (57.6%) rated telehealth quality as better-or-equal-to in-person visits. Inadequate health literacy was associated with lower likelihood of reporting telehealth quality and usefulness. In multivariable analyses, lower patient activation (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.19, 95% CI, 0.05-0.59) and limited English proficiency (AOR 0.12, 95% CI, 0.03-0.47) were less likely to report telehealth as being better than in-person visits; lower patient activation (AOR 0.06, 95% CI, 0.003-0.41) and income below poverty level (AOR 0.36, 95% CI, 0.13-0.98) were associated with difficulty remembering telehealth visit information.DiscussionMost participants reported usefulness and ease of navigating telehealth. Lower socioeconomic status, limited English proficiency, inadequate health literacy, lower educational attainment, and low patient activation are risks for poorer quality telehealth.ConclusionThe COVID pandemic has accelerated the adoption of telehealth, however, disparities in access and self-reported visit quality persist. Since telemedicine is here to stay, we identify vulnerable populations and discuss potential solutions to reduce healthcare disparities in telehealth use.
| S-EPMC11000823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceTelehealth use greatly increased in 2020 during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient preferences for telehealth or in-person care are an important factor in defining the role of telehealth in the postpandemic world.ObjectiveTo ascertain patient preferences for video visits after the ongoing COVID-19 public health emergency and to identify patient perceptions of the value of video visits and the role of out-of-pocket cost in changing patient preference for each visit modality.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study was conducted using a nationally representative sample of adult members of the RAND American Life Panel. The data were obtained from the American Life Panel Omnibus Survey, which was fielded between March 8 and 19, 2021.Main outcomes and measuresPreferences for video visits vs in-person care were analyzed in the survey. The first question was about participants' baseline preference for an in-person or a video visit for a nonemergency health issue. The second question entailed choosing between the preferred visit modality with a cost of $30 and another modality with a cost of $10. Questions also involved demographic characteristics, experience with video visits, willingness to use video visits, and preferences for the amount of telehealth use after the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsA total of 2080 of 3391 sampled panel members completed the survey (participation rate, 61.3%). Participants in the weighted sample had a mean (SE) age of 51.1 (0.67) years and were primarily women (1079 [51.9%]). Most participants (66.5%) preferred at least some video visits in the future, but when faced with a choice between an in-person or a video visit for a health care encounter that could be conducted either way, more than half of respondents (53.0%) preferred an in-person visit. Among those who initially preferred an in-person visit when out-of-pocket costs were not a factor, 49.8% still preferred in-person care and 23.5% switched to a video visit when confronted with higher relative costs for in-person care. In contrast, among those who initially preferred a video visit, only 18.9% still preferred a video visit and 61.7% switched to in-person visit when confronted with higher relative costs for video visits.Conclusions and relevanceThis survey study found that participants were generally willing to use video visits but preferred in-person care, and those who preferred video visits were more sensitive to paying out-of-pocket cost. These results suggest that understanding patient preferences will help identify telehealth's role in future health care delivery.
| S-EPMC8637257 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Craniofacial clinics are composed of multidisciplinary teams of providers to deliver coordinated and comprehensive patient care. The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted this model, as social distancing guidelines have precluded in-person patient appointments and forced clinics to reconsider their method of care delivery. The University of California, San Francisco, Craniofacial Center has continued to serve patients during this acute period, adopting a hybrid model in which the vast majority of patients are seen through telehealth and a limited number of patients are evaluated in-person. Surveyed patients and families reported high rates of satisfaction, with time savings cited as a particular benefit. Furthermore, most felt comfortable using the video technology required for their appointment. This experience has demonstrated to us that multidisciplinary craniofacial evaluations can be effectively delivered in a telehealth format and has informed our conception of idealized clinic structure. Moving forward, we intend to utilize telehealth visits for selected components of craniofacial evaluations in an effort to maximize efficiency and minimize burden, including addressing barriers to accessing care. Benefits of a hybrid model will include decongestion of clinics and waiting areas, allowing social distancing, addressing clinic space limits, and increased efficiency by eliminating the need for patient and family movement. Demonstration of the safety and efficacy of telehealth visits, combined with regulatory reform that improves reimbursement and allows for appointments across state lines, will be critical for this model to persist beyond the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7544296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTransitioning nonemergency, ambulatory medical care to virtual visits in light of the COVID-19 global pandemic has been a massive shift in philosophy and practice that naturally came with a steep learning curve for patients, physicians, and clinic administrators.ObjectiveWe undertook a multimethod study to understand the key factors associated with successful and less successful experiences of virtual specialist care, particularly as they relate to the patient experience of care.MethodsThis study was designed as a multimethod patient experience study using survey methods, descriptive qualitative interview methodology, and administrative virtual care data collected by the hospital decision support team. Six specialty departments participated in the study (endoscopy, orthopedics, neurology, hematology, rheumatology, and gastroenterology). All patients who could speak and read English and attended a virtual specialist appointment in a participating clinic at St. Michael's Hospital (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) between October 1, 2020, and January 30, 2021, were eligible to participate.ResultsDuring the study period, 51,702 virtual specialist visits were conducted in the departments that participated in the study. Of those, 96% were conducted by telephone and 4% by video. In both the survey and interview data, there was an overall consensus that virtual care is a satisfying alternative to in-person care, with benefits such as reduced travel, cost, time, and SARS-CoV-2 exposure, and increased convenience. Our analysis further revealed that the specific reason for the visit and the nature and status of the medical condition are important considerations in terms of guidance on where virtual care is most effective. Technology issues were not reported as a major challenge in our data, given that the majority of "virtual" visits reported by our participants were conducted by telephone, which is an important distinction. Despite the positive value of virtual care discussed by the majority of interview participants, 50% of the survey respondents still indicated they would prefer to see their physician in person.ConclusionsPatient experience data collected in this study indicate a high level of satisfaction with virtual specialty care, but also signal that there are nuances to be considered to ensure it is an appropriate and sustainable part of the standard of care.
| S-EPMC9239568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a rapid transformation of health services. This study aimed to understand the experiences of healthcare by people with interstitial lung disease (ILD), to inform future service delivery.MethodsFour specialist clinics in tertiary centres in Australia (Victoria:2 sites; New South Wales: 1 site; Western Australia: 1 site) recruited patients with ILD during an 8-week period from March 2021. Participants completed a COVID-specific questionnaire focused on health-related experiences during 2020.ResultsNinety nine (65% of 153) participants completed the questionnaire. 47% had idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis or connective tissue disease-associated ILD, 62% were female and the average age was 66 years. Whilst 56% rated their overall health in 2020 as the same as months prior, 38% indicated a worsening in health attributed to reduced physical activity and fear of contracting the virus. Access to healthcare professionals was 'good' in 61%, and 'fair-to-poor' for 37% due to missed respiratory assessments, with telehealth (mainly telephone) being perceived as less effective. 89% had contact with respiratory physicians, 68% with general practitioners, predominantly via telephone, with few video consultations. High satisfaction with care was reported by 78%, with lower satisfaction attributed to delays in assessments, disruption to usual services such as pulmonary rehabilitation, and dissatisfaction with telehealth.ConclusionPeople with ILD were generally satisfied with their care during 2020, however reduced access to healthcare professionals was challenging for those experiencing a deterioration in health. Telehealth was largely well received but did not always meet the needs of people with ILD particularly when unwell.
| S-EPMC10078026 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether chronically ill adults from communities participating in a community-level quality improvement effort reported greater improvement on four domains of patient experience: care coordination, patient satisfaction, provider interaction and support, and receipt of recommended care for diabetes.Study settingThe Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Aligning Forces for Quality (AF4Q) initiative provides multistakeholder alliances with funding and technical assistance to improve quality in their communities.Study designThis is a quasi-experimental, pre-post study. We used a difference-in-difference approach to detect relative changes over time on 16 survey-based outcome measures representing the four patient experience domains.Data collectionWe surveyed adults with chronic illness(es) in 14 AF4Q communities and a national comparison group. Wave 1 was completed in 2008 (8,140 respondents) and wave 2 in 2012 (9,565 respondents).Principal findingsRespondents from AF4Q communities reported modestly greater improvement on patient satisfaction and receipt of recommended care for diabetes.ConclusionsResults suggest that community-level QI efforts led by multistakeholder alliances hold the potential to improve patient satisfaction and receipt of recommended care for diabetes, but the magnitude of the effect may be limited. However, there is less evidence that community-level QI can improve patient perceptions of care coordination or provider interaction and support.
| S-EPMC4722218 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeEstablished models of reproductive health service delivery were disrupted by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study examines rapid innovation of remote abortion service operations across health care settings and describes the use of telehealth consultations with medications delivered directly to patients.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 clinical staff from 4 practice settings: family planning clinics, online medical services, and primary care practices-independent or within multispecialty health systems. Clinicians and administrators described their telehealth abortion services. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed. Staff roles, policies, and procedures were compared across practice settings.ResultsAcross all practice settings, telehealth abortion services consisted of 5 operational steps: patient engagement, care consultations, payment, medication dispensing, and follow-up communication. Online services and independent primary care practices used asynchronous methods to determine eligibility and complete consultations, resulting in more efficient services (2-5 minutes), while family planning and health system clinics used synchronous video encounters requiring 10-30 minutes of clinician time. Family planning and health system primary care clinics mailed medications from clinic stock or internal pharmacies, while independent primary care practices and online services often used mail-order pharmacies. Online services offered patients asynchronous follow-up; other practice settings scheduled synchronous appointments.ConclusionsRapid innovations implemented in response to disrupted in-person reproductive health care included remote medication abortion services with telehealth assessment/follow-up and mailed medications. Though consistent operational steps were identified across health care settings, variation allowed for adaptation of services to individual sites. Understanding remote abortion service operations may facilitate dissemination of a range of patient-centered reproductive health services.Annals "Online First" article.
| S-EPMC9328706 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of telehealth has been discussed nationally as an option to address provider shortages for children, birth through two, enrolled in Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Early Intervention (EI) programs. Telehealth is an evidence-based service delivery model which can be used to remove barriers in providing EI services to children and their families. In 2016, Colorado's Part C Early Intervention (EI) program began allowing the use of telehealth as an option for providers to conduct sessions with children and their caregivers. This article outlines the process taken to develop the necessary requirements and supports for telehealth to be incorporated into EI current practice.
| S-EPMC5536732 | biostudies-other