Dataset Information

Heart Failure Virtual Consultation: bridging the gap of heart failure care in the community - A mixed-methods evaluation.

ABSTRACT: We undertook a mixed-methods evaluation of a Web-based conferencing service (virtual consult) between general practitioners (GPs) and cardiologists in managing patients with heart failure in the community to determine its effect on use of specialist heart failure services and acceptability to GPs.All cases from June 2015 to October 2016 were recorded using a standardized recording template, which recorded patient demographics, medical history, medications, and outcome of the virtual consult for each case. Quantitative surveys and qualitative interviewing of 17 participating GPs were also undertaken. During this time, 142 cases were discussed-68 relating to a new diagnosis of heart failure, 53 relating to emerging deterioration in a known heart failure patient, and 21 relating to therapeutic issues. Only 17% required review in outpatient department following the virtual consultation. GPs reported increased confidence in heart failure management, a broadening of their knowledge base, and a perception of overall better patient outcomes.These data from an initial experience with Heart Failure Virtual Consultation present a very positive impact of this strategy on the provision of heart failure care in the community and acceptability to users. Further research on the implementation and expansion of this strategy is warranted.

SUBMITTER: Gallagher J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5542774 | biostudies-other | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the impact and transferability of a novel teaching method on virtual communication skills for final year medical students.DesignMixed-methods, interventional before-and-after study.SettingNHS Lanarkshire, Scotland.Participants21 final year medical students on their obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) placement from September to December 2020.InterventionsA two-part teaching session on virtual communication skills.Main outcome measuresSelf-reported confidence in conducting consultations preteaching and post-teaching, exposure to virtual consultations, usefulness of teaching and transferability to primary care. Data were collected using preteaching and post-teaching evaluation tools and an online survey.ResultsOf 21 participants, 1 student did not attend the second session so was excluded from post-teaching evaluation results and the online survey. Preteaching results were collected from 21 participants and post-teaching results from 20. Mean confidence scores increased across all domains post-teaching. Mean confidence in opening the consultation increased from 2.67 (95% CI 2.21 to 3.13) to 4.70 (95% CI 4.50 to 4.90); history-taking from 3.38 (95% CI 3.07 to 3.69) to 4.45 (95% CI 4.19 to 4.71); decision-making and forming a management plan from 2.62 (95% CI 2.28 to 2.96) to 3.90 (95% CI 3.66 to 4.14) and closing the consultation from 2.81 (95% CI 2.45 to 3.17) to 4.60 (95% CI 4.38 to 4.81). There was no change in exposure to virtual consultations during O&G placement. 16 (80%) participants responded to the online survey; 14 (87.5%) rated the sessions 'very useful' and all 16 considered them worthwhile continuing. 12 (75%) had the opportunity to practise virtual consultations on general practitioner, mostly via telephone.ConclusionsWe found that teaching students virtual consultation skills improved short term confidence and were transferable to primary care placements. Future research is suggested to assess this teaching model following adaptation and incorporation into medical education and training across specialties and grades. It would be useful to evaluate the impact on competence post intervention through observed skills.

Project description:AimsHeart failure (HF) is an important health problem for which multidisciplinary care is recommended, yet few studies involve primary care practitioners in the multidisciplinary management of HF. We set up a multifaceted prospective observational trial, OSCAR-HF, piloting audit and feedback, natriuretic peptide testing at the point of care, and the assistance of a specialist HF nurse in primary care. The aim was to optimize HF care in general practice.Methods and resultsThis is an analysis at 6 month follow-up of the study interventions of the OSCAR-HF pilot study, a nonrandomized, noncontrolled prospective observational trial conducted in eight Belgian general practices [51 general practitioners (GPs)]. Patients who were assessed by their GP to have HF constituted the OSCAR-HF study population. We used descriptive statistics and mixed-effects modelling for the quantitative analysis and thematic analysis of the focus group interviews. There was a 10.2% increase in the registered HF population after 6 months of follow-up (n = 593) compared with baseline (n = 538) and a 27% increase in objectified HF diagnoses (baseline n = 359 to 456 at T6 M). Natriuretic peptide testing (with or without referral) accounted for 54% (n = 60/111) of the newly registered HF diagnoses. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction who received their target dosage of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors or beta-blockers at 6 months compared with baseline (P = 0.9). Patients who received an HF nurse intervention (n = 53) had significantly worse quality of life at baseline [difference in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) score 9.2 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.0, 14] and had a significantly greater improvement in quality-of-life scores at the 6 month follow-up [change in MLHFQ score -9.8 points; 95% CI -15, -4.5] than patients without an HF nurse intervention. GPs found audit and feedback valuable but time intensive. Natriuretic peptides were useful, but the point-of-care test was impractical, and the assistance of an HF nurse was a useful addition to routine HF care.ConclusionsThe use of audit and feedback combined with natriuretic peptide testing was a successful strategy to increase the number of registered and objectified HF diagnoses at 6 months. GPs and HF nurses selected patients with worse quality-of-life scores at baseline for the HF nurse intervention, which led to a significantly greater improvement in quality-of-life scores at the 6 month follow-up compared with patients without an HF nurse intervention. The interventions were deemed feasible and useful by the participating GPs with some specific remarks that can be used for optimization.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02905786), registered on 14 September 2016 at https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Project description:BackgroundMedication nonadherence is a global public health challenge that results in suboptimal health outcomes and increases health care costs. Forgetting to take medicines is one of the most common reasons for unintentional medication nonadherence. Research findings indicate that voice-activated virtual home assistants, such as Amazon Echo and Google Home devices, may be useful in promoting medication adherence.ObjectiveThis study aims to create a medication adherence app (skill), MedBuddy, for Amazon Echo devices and measure the use, usability, and usefulness of this medication-taking reminder skill.MethodsA single-group, mixed methods, cohort feasibility study was conducted with women who took oral contraceptives (N=25). Participants were undergraduate students (age: mean 21.8 years, SD 6.2) at an urban university in the Southeast United States. Participants were given an Amazon Echo Dot with MedBuddy-a new medication reminder skill for Echo devices created by our team-attached to their study account, which they used for 60 days. Participants self-reported their baseline and poststudy medication adherence. MedBuddy use was objectively evaluated by tracking participants' interactions with MedBuddy through Amazon Alexa. The usability and usefulness of MedBuddy were evaluated through a poststudy interview in which participants responded to both quantitative and qualitative questions.ResultsParticipants' interactions with MedBuddy, as tracked through Amazon Alexa, only occurred on half of the study days (mean 50.97, SD 29.5). At study end, participants reported missing their medication less in the past 1 and 6 months compared with baseline (χ21=0.9 and χ21=0.4, respectively; McNemar test: P<.001 for both). However, there was no significant difference in participants' reported adherence to consistently taking medication within the same 2-hour time frame every day in the past 1 or 6 months at the end of the study compared with baseline (χ21=3.5 and χ21=0.4, respectively; McNemar test: P=.63 and P=.07, respectively). Overall feedback about usability was positive, and participants provided constructive feedback about the skill's features that could be improved. Participants' evaluation of MedBuddy's usefulness was overwhelmingly positive-most (15/23, 65%) said that they would continue using MedBuddy as a medication reminder if provided with the opportunity and that they would recommend it to others. MedBuddy features that participants enjoyed were an external prompt separate from their phone, the ability to hear the reminder prompt from a separate room, multiple reminders, and verbal responses to prompts.ConclusionsThe findings of this feasibility study indicate that the MedBuddy medication reminder skill may be useful in promoting medication adherence. However, the skill could benefit from further usability enhancements.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the central role of mixed methods in health research, studies evaluating online methods training in the health sciences are nonexistent. The focused goal was to evaluate online training by comparing the self-rated skills of scholars who experienced an in-person retreat to scholars in an online retreat in specific domains of mixed methods research for the health sciences from 2015-2023.MethodsThe authors administered a scholar Mixed Methods Skills Self-Assessment instrument based on an educational competency scale that included domains on: "research questions," "design/approach," "sampling," "analysis," and "dissemination" to participants of the Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences (MMRTP). Self-ratings on confidence on domains were compared before and after retreat participation within cohorts who attended in person (n = 73) or online (n = 57) as well as comparing across in-person to online cohorts. Responses to open-ended questions about experiences with the retreat were analyzed.ResultsScholars in an interactive program to improve mixed methods skills reported significantly increased confidence in ability to define or explain concepts and in ability to apply the concepts to practical problems, whether the program was attended in-person or synchronously online. Scholars in the online retreat had self-rated skill improvements as good or better than scholars who participated in person. With the possible exception of networking, scholars found the online format was associated with advantages such as accessibility and reduced burden of travel and finding childcare. No differences in difficulty of learning concepts was described.ConclusionsKeeping in mind that the retreat is only one component of the MMRTP, this study provides evidence that mixed methods training online was associated with the same increases in self-rated skills as persons attending online and can be a key component to increasing the capacity for mixed methods research in the health sciences.

Project description:BackgroundVirtual care was rapidly integrated into pediatric health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. While virtual care offers many benefits, it is necessary to better understand the experiences of those who receive, deliver, and coordinate virtual care in order to support sustainable, high-quality, and patient-centered health care. To date, methods implemented to evaluate users' experiences of virtual care have been highly variable, making comparison and data synthesis difficult.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe evaluation strategies currently used to understand personal experiences with pediatric virtual care in Canada.MethodsIn this mixed methods environmental scan, we first distributed a web-based questionnaire to clinical, research, and operational leaders delivering and evaluating pediatric virtual care in Canada. The questionnaire collected information about how experiences with virtual care have been or are currently being evaluated and whether these evaluations included the perspectives of children or youth, families, providers, or support staff. Second, respondents were asked to share the questions they used in their evaluations, and a content analysis was performed to identify common question categories. Third, we conducted semistructured interviews to further explore our respondents' evaluation experiences across 4 domains-evaluation approaches, distribution methods, response rates, and lessons learned-and interest in a core set of questions for future evaluations.ResultsThere were 72 respondents to the web-based questionnaire; among those who had conducted an evaluation, we identified 15 unique evaluations, and 14 of those provided a copy of the tools used to evaluate virtual care. These evaluations measured the virtual care experiences of parents or caregivers (n=15, 100%), children or youth (n=11, 73%), health care providers (n=11, 73%), and support staff (n=4, 27%). The most common data collection method used was electronic questionnaires distributed by email. Two respondents used validated tools; the remainder modified existing tools or developed new tools. Content analysis of the 14 submitted questionnaires revealed that the most common questions were about overall participant satisfaction, the comparison of virtual care to in-person care, and whether participants would choose virtual care options in the future. Interview findings indicate respondents frequently relied on methods used by peers and that a standardized, core set of questions to evaluate experiences with virtual care would be helpful to improve evaluation practices and support pediatric health care delivery.ConclusionsAt our institution and elsewhere in Canada, experiences with pediatric virtual care have been evaluated using a variety of methods. A more consistent evaluation approach using standardized tools may enable more regular comparisons of experiences with virtual care and the synthesis of findings across health care settings. In turn, this may better inform our approach to virtual care, improve its integration into health systems, and facilitate sustainable, high-quality, patient-centered care.

Project description:BackgroundGuideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Optimizing GDMT in the hospital is associated with greater long-term use in HFrEF. This study aimed to describe the efficacy of a multidisciplinary virtual HF intervention on GDMT optimization among patients with HFrEF admitted for any cause.MethodsIn this pilot randomized, controlled study, consecutive patients with HFrEF admitted to noncardiology medicine services for any cause were identified at a large academic tertiary care hospital between May to September 2021. Major exclusions were end-stage renal disease, hemodynamic instability, concurrent COVID-19 infection, and current enrollment in hospice care. Patients were randomized to a clinician-level virtual peer-to-peer consult intervention providing GDMT recommendations and information on medication costs versus usual care. Primary end points included (1) proportion of patients with new GDMT initiation or use and (2) changes to HF optimal medical therapy scores which included target dosing (range, 0-9).ResultsOf 242 patients identified, 91 (38%) were eligible and randomized to intervention (N=52) or usual care (N=39). Baseline characteristics were similar between intervention and usual care (mean age 63 versus 67 years, 23% versus 26% female, 46% versus 49% Black, mean ejection fraction 33% versus 31%). GDMT use on admission was also similar. There were greater proportions of patients with GDMT initiation or continuation with the intervention compared with usual care. After adjusting for optimal medical therapy score on admission, changes to optimal medical therapy score at discharge were higher for the intervention group compared with usual care (+0.44 versus -0.31, absolute difference +0.75, adjusted estimate 0.86±0.42; P=0.041).ConclusionsAmong eligible patients with HFrEF hospitalized for any cause on noncardiology services, a multidisciplinary pilot virtual HF consultation increased new GDMT initiation and dose optimization at discharge.

Project description:Background The COVID-19 pandemic forced Veterans Health Administration facilities to rapidly adopt and deploy telehealth alternatives to provide continuity of care to veterans while minimizing physical contact. The impact of moving to virtual visits on patients with congestive heart failure (HF) is unknown. The goal of this study was to understand how patients with HF and their providers experienced the shift to telehealth for managing a chronic condition, and to inform best practices for continued telehealth use. Methods and Results We identified Veterans Health Administration Medical Centers with high telehealth use before COVID-19 and sites that were forced to adopt telehealth in response to COVID-19, and interviewed cardiology providers and veterans with HF about their experiences using telehealth. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using team-based rapid content analysis. We identified 3 trajectory patterns for cardiology telehealth use before and during COVID-19. They were the low-use class (low to low), high-use class (relatively high to higher), and increased-use class (low to high). The high-use and increased-use classes fit the criteria for sites that had high telehealth use before COVID-19 and sites that rapidly adopted telehealth in response to COVID-19. There were 12 sites in the high-use class and 4 sites in the increased-use class. To match with the number of sites in the increased-use class, we selected the top 4 sites by looking at the months before COVID-19. We identified 3 themes related to telehealth use among patients with HF and cardiology providers: (1) technology was the primary barrier for both patients and providers; (2) infrastructural support was the primary facilitator for providers; and (3) both patients and providers had largely neutral opinions on how telehealth compares to in-person care but described situations in which telehealth is not appropriate. Conclusions Only 12 sites fit the criteria of high telehealth use in cardiology before COVID-19, and 4 fit the criteria of low use that increased in response to COVID-19. Patients and providers at both site types were largely satisfied using telehealth to manage HF. Understanding best practices for managing ambulatory care-sensitive conditions through virtual visits can help the Veterans Health Administration prepare for long-term impacts of COVID-19 on in-person visits, as well as improve access to care for veterans who live remotely or who have difficulty traveling to in-person appointments.

Dataset Information

Heart Failure Virtual Consultation: bridging the gap of heart failure care in the community - A mixed-methods evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets