Examining GP online consultation in a primary care setting in east midlands, UK

Effectiveness and safety of asynchronous telemedicine consultations in general practice: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a focus on increasing asynchronous telemedicine use, which allows medical data to be transmitted, stored, and interpreted later; however, limited evidence of the quality of care it allows in general practice hinders its use.

AIM

To investigate uses and effectiveness of asynchronous telemedicine in general practice, according to the domains of healthcare quality, and describe how the COVID-19 pandemic changed its use.

DESIGN & SETTING

Systematic review in general practice.

METHOD

A systematic search was carried out across four databases using terms related to general practice, asynchronous telemedicine, uses, and effectiveness, and supported by citation searching. This was followed by screening according to pre-defined criteria, data extraction, and critical appraisal. Narrative synthesis was then undertaken guided by the six domains of healthcare quality and exploring differences in use before and following the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Searches yielded 6864 reports; 27 reports from 23 studies were included. Asynchronous telemedicine is used by a range of staff and patients across many countries. Safety and equity are poorly reported but there were no major safety concerns. Evidence from other domains of healthcare quality show effectiveness in making diagnoses, prescribing medications, replacing other consultations, providing timely care, and increased convenience for patients. Efficiency is impacted by negative effects on workflow, through poor implementation and patient non-adherence, limiting usability and requiring new administrative approaches from healthcare staff. Asynchronous telemedicine use increased rapidly from March 2020, following the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak.

CONCLUSION

Asynchronous telemedicine provides quality care for patients but is limited by reports of increased workload and inefficient workflow compared with face-to-face consultations. Limits of evidence include heterogeneity and small-scale studies. Further research into cost-effectiveness, equity, safety, and sustained implementation will influence future policy and practice.

Suitability of issuing sickness certifications in remote consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic. A mixed method study of GPs' experiences

OBJECTIVE

To explore Norwegian GPs' experiences with and perceived suitability of issuing sickness certifications in remote consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

We used a mixed methods research design. An online survey with 301 respondents was combined with qualitative interviews with ten GPs.

SETTING

Norwegian general practice.

RESULTS

Most GPs agreed it was difficult to assess a patient's ability to work without physical attendance for a first-time certification in remote consultations. However, extending a certification was considered less problematic. If physical examinations were required, the GPs would ask the patient to come to the office. The most suitable diagnoses for remote certification were respiratory infections and COVID-19-related diagnoses, as well as known chronic and long-term diseases. The GPs emphasized the importance of knowing both the patient and the medical problem. The GP-patient relationship could be affected by remote consultations, and there were mixed views on the impact. Many GPs found it easier to deny a request for a sickness certification in remote consultations. The GPs expressed concern about the societal costs and an increased number of certifications if remote consultations were too easily accessible. The study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the findings should be interpreted in that context.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that issuing sickness certifications in remote consultations were viewed to be suitable for COVID-19 related problems, for patients the GP has met before, for the follow-up of known medical problems, and the extension of sickness certifications. Not meeting the patient face-to-face may affect the GP-patient relationship as well as make the GPs' dual role more challenging.

General Practitioners' Experiences With Potentials and Pitfalls of Video Consultations in Norway During the COVID-19 Lockdown: Qualitative Analysis of Free-Text Survey Answers

BACKGROUND

The use of video consultations (VCs) in Norwegian general practice rapidly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. During societal lockdowns, VCs were used for nearly all types of clinical problems, as in-person consultations were kept to a minimum.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs') experiences of potentials and pitfalls associated with the use of VCs during the first pandemic lockdown.

METHODS

Between April 14 and May 3, 2020, all regular Norwegian GPs (N=4858) were invited to answer a web-based survey, which included open-ended questions about their experiences with the advantages and pitfalls of VCs. A total of 2558 free-text answers were provided by 657 of the 1237 GPs who participated in the survey. The material was subjected to reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified. First, VCs are described as being particularly convenient, informative, and effective for consultations with previously known patients. Second, strategically planned VCs may facilitate effective tailoring of clinical trajectories that optimize clinical workflow. VCs allow for an initial overview of the problem (triage), follow-up evaluation after an in-person consultation, provision of advice and information concerning test results and discharge notes, extension of sick leaves, and delivery of other medical certificates. VCs may, in certain situations, enhance the GPs' insight in their patients' relational and socioeconomical resources and vulnerabilities, and even facilitate relationship-building with patients in need of care who might otherwise be reluctant to seek help. Third, VCs are characterized by a demarcated communication style and the "one problem approach," which may entail effectiveness in the short run. However, the web-based communication climate implies degradation of valuable nonverbal signals that are more evidently present in in-person consultations. Finally, overreliance on VCs may, in a longer perspective, undermine the establishment and maintenance of relational trust, with a negative impact on the quality of care and patient safety. Compensatory mechanisms include clarifying with the patient what the next step is, answering any questions and giving further advice on treatment if conditions do not improve or there is a need for follow-up. Participation of family members can also be helpful to improve reciprocal understanding and safety.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings have relevance for future implementation of VCs and deserve further exploration under less stressful circumstances.

Consultation Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Experience of Lithuanian Physicians

Crises in the medicine sector such as the COVID-19 pandemic encourage the search for effective solutions for the provision of health care services, when conventional face-to-face consultations may be difficult to deliver effectively due to contact restrictions. The main objective of this study was to investigate consultation management provided by physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic in Lithuania. The dependence of diagnostic testing and vaccination of patients on the socio-demographic characteristics of physicians was also assessed. An anonymous survey was carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic, between 21 June 2021 and 17 September 2021, involving 191 physicians (9% of the total population) working in family physician teams in Lithuania. Thirty-nine Lithuanian Primary Health Care Institutions (PHCIs) were selected for this study, of which 11 were public and 28 were private. Private and public PHCIs employed 31% and 63% of the respondents, respectively, and 6% of respondents worked at both types of institutions. Concerning telemedicine, the physician-respondents frequently provided consultations over the telephone (79.6%) and in-person (63.9%), but less so via the Internet, with the latter option never being used at all by 57.1% of the respondents. Whilst telephone consultations were frequently provided by Lithuanian physicians, only half of the respondents chose to provide services over the Internet. Private, smaller, and rural-based PHCIs should more actively offer viral diagnostics and vaccination services.

Why 'one size fits all' is not enough when designing COVID-19 immunity certificates for domestic use: a UK-wide cross-sectional online survey

OBJECTIVES

The present study explored public's willingness to use COVID-19 immunity certificates across six different domestic scenarios.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional online survey.

SETTING

UK representative survey conducted on 3 August 2021.

PARTICIPANTS

534 UK residents over 18 years old.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants replied to the same set of questions.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was willingness to use immunity certificates across three different domestic settings: (1) visiting the general practitioner (GP) for a non-urgent health issue; (2) dining in a restaurant and (3) attending a performance in a theatre. For each setting two options, one prioritising convenience (option A) and the other privacy (option B), were offered. Our secondary outcome measures were computed indices from items adapted from the Health Belief Model; attitudes towards sharing immunity status with service providers; prior to COVID-19 lifestyle. In addition, we recorded data about respondents' sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Respondents were more willing to use immunity certificates that prioritised convenience (92%), rather than privacy (76%), when visiting their GP . However, privacy was more favourable in the other two settings (dining in a restaurant (84%) and going to a theatre (83%)) compared with convenience (38% and 39% respectively). Personal beliefs about COVID-19 and immunity certificates were associated with variations in willingness to use these across all scenarios. No variations were observed across sociodemographics and lifestyle.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this survey suggest that there is not one-size-fits-all solution for designing immunity certificates. Immunity certificates are complex sociotechnical systems, any attempt to implement these for domestic use should be tailored to different settings and user needs. The design of certification services requires a more evidence-based approach and further research is needed to understand how different settings, design elements (like convenience or privacy) and personal beliefs about the pandemic should inform their design.