Telehealth challenges during COVID-19 as reported by primary healthcare physicians in Quebec and Massachusetts.
COVID-19
Family physicians
Primary healthcare
Telehealth
Journal
BMC family practice
ISSN: 1471-2296
Titre abrégé: BMC Fam Pract
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967792
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
26 09 2021
26 09 2021
Historique:
received:
07
05
2021
accepted:
08
09
2021
entrez:
26
9
2021
pubmed:
27
9
2021
medline:
1
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The COVID-19 pandemic has driven primary healthcare (PHC) providers to use telehealth as an alternative to traditional face-to-face consultations. Providing telehealth that meets the needs of patients in a pandemic has presented many challenges for PHC providers. The aim of this study was to describe the positive and negative implications of using telehealth in one Canadian (Quebec) and one American (Massachusetts) PHC setting during the COVID-19 pandemic as reported by physicians. We conducted 42 individual semi-structured video interviews with physicians in Quebec (N = 20) and Massachusetts (N = 22) in 2020. Topics covered included their practice history, changes brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the advantages and challenges of telehealth. An inductive and deductive thematic analysis was carried out to identify implications of delivering care via telehealth. Four key themes were identified, each with positive and negative implications: 1) access for patients; 2) efficiency of care delivery; 3) professional impacts; and 4) relational dimensions of care. For patients' access, positive implications referred to increased availability of services; negative implications involved barriers due to difficulties with access to and use of technologies. Positive implications for efficiency were related to improved follow-up care; negative implications involved difficulties in diagnosing in the absence of direct physical examination and non-verbal cues. For professional impacts, positive implications were related to flexibility (teleworking, more availability for patients) and reimbursement, while negative implications were related to technological limitations experienced by both patients and practitioners. For relational dimensions, positive implications included improved communication, as patients were more at ease at home, and the possibility of gathering information from what could be seen of the patient's environment; negative implications were related to concerns around maintaining the therapeutic relationship and changes in patients' engagement and expectations. Ensuring that health services provision meets patients' needs at all times calls for flexibility in care delivery modalities, role shifting to adapt to virtual care, sustained relationships with patients, and interprofessional collaboration. To succeed, these efforts require guidelines and training, as well as careful attention to technological barriers and interpersonal relationship needs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The COVID-19 pandemic has driven primary healthcare (PHC) providers to use telehealth as an alternative to traditional face-to-face consultations. Providing telehealth that meets the needs of patients in a pandemic has presented many challenges for PHC providers. The aim of this study was to describe the positive and negative implications of using telehealth in one Canadian (Quebec) and one American (Massachusetts) PHC setting during the COVID-19 pandemic as reported by physicians.
METHODS
We conducted 42 individual semi-structured video interviews with physicians in Quebec (N = 20) and Massachusetts (N = 22) in 2020. Topics covered included their practice history, changes brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the advantages and challenges of telehealth. An inductive and deductive thematic analysis was carried out to identify implications of delivering care via telehealth.
RESULTS
Four key themes were identified, each with positive and negative implications: 1) access for patients; 2) efficiency of care delivery; 3) professional impacts; and 4) relational dimensions of care. For patients' access, positive implications referred to increased availability of services; negative implications involved barriers due to difficulties with access to and use of technologies. Positive implications for efficiency were related to improved follow-up care; negative implications involved difficulties in diagnosing in the absence of direct physical examination and non-verbal cues. For professional impacts, positive implications were related to flexibility (teleworking, more availability for patients) and reimbursement, while negative implications were related to technological limitations experienced by both patients and practitioners. For relational dimensions, positive implications included improved communication, as patients were more at ease at home, and the possibility of gathering information from what could be seen of the patient's environment; negative implications were related to concerns around maintaining the therapeutic relationship and changes in patients' engagement and expectations.
CONCLUSION
Ensuring that health services provision meets patients' needs at all times calls for flexibility in care delivery modalities, role shifting to adapt to virtual care, sustained relationships with patients, and interprofessional collaboration. To succeed, these efforts require guidelines and training, as well as careful attention to technological barriers and interpersonal relationship needs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34563113
doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01543-4
pii: 10.1186/s12875-021-01543-4
pmc: PMC8467009
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
192Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
J Am Board Fam Med. 2021 Feb;34(Suppl):S61-S70
pubmed: 33622820
Healthc Policy. 2020 Aug;16(1):112-124
pubmed: 32813643
Ann Fam Med. 2020 May;18(3):272-277
pubmed: 32393566
Paediatr Respir Rev. 2020 Sep;35:38-42
pubmed: 32653468
Fam Med Community Health. 2020 Aug;8(3):
pubmed: 32816942
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jun 4;382(23):e82
pubmed: 32240581
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Jun 2;22(6):e19361
pubmed: 32452816
Med Teach. 2019 Jun;41(6):714-715
pubmed: 29944031
JMIR Res Protoc. 2020 Dec 7;9(12):e22847
pubmed: 33211020
J Card Fail. 2020 Jun;26(6):448-456
pubmed: 32315732
Acta Inform Med. 2016 Jul 16;24(4):286-292
pubmed: 27708494
Ann Intern Med. 2020 Oct 6;173(7):527-535
pubmed: 32628536
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Oct 1;3(10):e2021476
pubmed: 33006622
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020 Apr 15;6(2):e18811
pubmed: 32252023
BMC Fam Pract. 2021 Feb 3;22(1):31
pubmed: 33535973
JAMA Neurol. 2020 Aug 1;77(8):927-928
pubmed: 32329796
J Telemed Telecare. 2020 Jun;26(5):309-313
pubmed: 32196391
JAMA. 2020 Jun 16;323(23):2375-2376
pubmed: 32421170