Remote primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic for people experiencing homelessness: a qualitative study

GP access for inclusion health groups: perspectives and recommendations

BACKGROUND

General practice has seen the widespread adoption of remote consulting and triage systems. There is a lack of evidence exploring how inclusion health populations have been impacted by this transformation.

AIM

This study aimed to explore the post-pandemic GP access for inclusion health populations, through the lens of those with lived experience, and identify practical recommendations for improving access for this population.

DESIGN & SETTING

A mixed-methods study exploring the direct experience of people from inclusion health groups trying to access GP care in 13 practices in east London.

METHOD

A mystery shopper exercise involving 39 in-person practice visits and 13 phone calls were undertaken. The findings were reflected on by a multidisciplinary stakeholder group, which identified recommendations for improvements.

RESULTS

Only 31% of the mystery shopper visits (n = 8) resulted in registration and the offer of an appointment to see a GP for an urgent problem. None of the mystery shoppers was able to book an appointment over the phone but n = 10/13 felt that they would be able to register and make an appointment if they followed the receptionist's instructions. Most mystery shoppers felt respected, listened to, and understood the information provided to them. Just under half of the practices (46%, n = 6) received positive comments on how accessible and supportive their spaces felt. Practice- and system-level recommendations were identified by the stakeholder group.

CONCLUSION

Ongoing GP access issues persist for inclusion health populations. We identified practice- and system-level recommendations for improving access for this vulnerable population.

Recommendations to advance digital health equity: a systematic review of qualitative studies

The World Health Organisation advocates Digital Health Technologies (DHTs) for advancing population health, yet concerns about inequitable outcomes persist. Differences in access and use of DHTs across different demographic groups can contribute to inequities. Academics and policy makers have acknowledged this issue and called for inclusive digital health strategies. This systematic review synthesizes literature on these strategies and assesses facilitators and barriers to their implementation. We searched four large databases for qualitative studies using terms relevant to digital technology, health inequities, and socio-demographic factors associated with digital exclusion summarised by the CLEARS framework (Culture, Limiting conditions, Education, Age, Residence, Socioeconomic status). Following the PRISMA guidelines, 10,401 articles were screened independently by two reviewers, with ten articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Strategies were grouped into either outreach programmes or co-design approaches. Narrative synthesis of these strategies highlighted three key themes: firstly, using user-friendly designs, which included software and website interfaces that were easy to navigate and compatible with existing devices, culturally appropriate content, and engaging features. Secondly, providing supportive infrastructure to users, which included devices, free connectivity, and non-digital options to help access healthcare. Thirdly, providing educational support from family, friends, or professionals to help individuals develop their digital literacy skills to support the use of DHTs. Recommendations for advancing digital health equity include adopting a collaborative working approach to meet users' needs, and using effective advertising to raise awareness of the available support. Further research is needed to assess the feasibility and impact of these recommendations in practice.

Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

People with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD) who experience combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, violence, abuse, and poor mental health have high health needs and poor access to primary care.

AIM

To improve access to general practice for people with SMD by facilitating collaborative service improvement meetings between healthcare staff, people with lived experience of SMD, and those who support them; participants were then interviewed about this work.

DESIGN AND SETTING

The Bridging Gaps group is a collaboration between healthcare staff, researchers, women with lived experience of SMD, and a charity that supports them in a UK city. A project was co-produced by the Bridging Gaps group to improve access to general practice for people with SMD, which was further developed with three inner-city general practices.

METHOD

Nine service improvement meetings were facilitated at three general practices, and six of these were formally observed. Nine practice staff and four women with lived experience of SMD were interviewed. Three women with lived experience of SMD and one staff member who supports them participated in a focus group. Data were analysed inductively and deductively using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

By providing time and funding opportunities to motivated general practice staff and involving participants with lived experience of SMD, service changes were made in an effort to improve access for people with SMD. These included prioritising patients on an inclusion patient list with more flexible access, providing continuity for patients via a care coordinator and micro-team of clinicians, and developing an information-sharing document. The process and outcomes improved connections within and between general practices, support organisations, and people with SMD.

CONCLUSION

The co-designed strategies described in this study could be adapted locally and evaluated in other areas. Investing in this focused way of working may improve accessibility to health care, health equity, and staff wellbeing.

Real-time evaluation of a multi-agency TB-screening event for persons experiencing homelessness in a town with a low incidence of TB in England

Real-time evaluation (RTE) supports populations (e.g., persons experiencing homelessness (PEH) to engage in evaluation of health interventions who may otherwise be overlooked. The aim of this RTE was to explore the understanding of TB amongst PEH, identify barriers/facilitators to attending screening for PEH alongside suggestions for improving TB-screening events targeting PEH, who have high and complex health needs. This RTE composed of free-text structured one-to-one interviews performed immediately after screening at a single tuberculosis (TB) screening event. Handwritten forms were transcribed for thematic analysis, with codes ascribed to answers that were developed into core themes. All RTE participants (n=15) learned about the screening event on the day it was held. Key concerns amongst screening attendees included: stigma around drug use, not understanding the purpose of TB screening, lack of trusted individuals/services present, too many partner organizations involved, and language barriers. Facilitators to screening included a positive welcome to the event, a satisfactory explanation of screening tests, and sharing of results. A need for improved event promotion alongside communication of the purpose of TB screening amongst PEH was also identified. A lack of trust identified by some participants suggests the range of services present should be reconsidered for future screening events.

A paradox of problems in accessing general practice: a qualitative participatory case study

BACKGROUND

Despite longstanding problems of access to general practice, attempts to understand and address the issues do not adequately include perspectives of the people providing or using care, nor do they use established theories of access to understand complexity.

AIM

To understand problems of access to general practice from the multiple perspectives of service users and staff using an applied theory of access.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative participatory case study in an area of northwest England.

METHOD

A community-based participatory approach was used with qualitative interviews, focus groups, and observation to understand perspectives about accessing general practice. Data were collected between October 2015 and October 2016. Inductive and abductive analysis, informed by Levesque et al's theory of access, allowed the team to identify complexities and relationships between interrelated problems.

RESULTS

This study presents a paradox of problems in accessing general practice, in which the demand on general practice both creates and hides unmet need in the population. Data show how reactive rules to control demand have undermined important aspects of care, such as continuity. The layers of rules and decreased continuity create extra work for practice staff, clinicians, and patients. Complicated rules, combined with a lack of capacity to reach out or be flexible, leave many patients, including those with complex and/or unrecognised health needs, unable to navigate the system to access care. This relationship between demand and unmet need exacerbates existing health inequities.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the paradox of access problems allows for different targets for change and different solutions to free up capacity in general practice to address the unmet need in the population.

Providing care to marginalised communities: a qualitative study of community pharmacy teams

BACKGROUND

Health inequalities in the UK are widening, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Community pharmacies are the most visited healthcare provider in England and are ideally placed to provide and facilitate access to care for those most disadvantaged.

AIM

To explore the experiences and needs of community pharmacy teams in providing care for marginalised groups and how this has changed since the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A qualitative study in community pharmacy and across primary care.

METHOD

Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with members of community pharmacy teams, primary care network (PCN) pharmacists, GPs, and nurses in the North of England.

RESULTS

In total, 31 individuals participated in an interview (26 pharmacy staff, three GPs, and two nurses). Most participants acknowledged that their pharmacy had become busier since COVID-19 because of increased footfall compounded by patient difficulties in navigating remote digital systems. Few participants had received any formal training on working with marginalised communities; however, organisational barriers (such as lack of access to translation facilities) combined with interorganisational barriers (such as lack of integrated care) made it more difficult to provide care for some marginalised groups. Despite this, the continuity of care provided by many pharmacies was viewed as an important factor in enabling marginalised groups to access and receive care.

CONCLUSION

There are opportunities to better utilise the skills of community pharmacy teams. Resources, such as access to translation services, and interventions to enable better communication between community pharmacy teams and other primary care services, such as general practice, are essential.

Cross-sectional analyses of online appointment booking and repeat prescription ordering user characteristics in general practices of England in the years 2018-2020

OBJECTIVES

To explore the characteristics of the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) respondents using the different functionalities of the online services in the context of England's National Health Service General Practices. We hypothesised that respondents who are older, with lower socioeconomic status and non-white ethnicity would be less likely to use online services, while long-term conditions might increase their usage.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using respondent-level data from the GPPS in England of the years 2018, 2019 and 2020. We assessed the association between online services use and respondent characteristics using two-level mixed-effects logistic regression.

PARTICIPANTS

Survey respondents of the GPPS 2018-2020.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Online appointment booking and online repeat prescription ordering.

RESULTS

1 807 049 survey respondents were included in this study. 15% (n=263 938) used online appointment booking in the previous 12 months, and 19% (n=339 449) had ordered a repeat prescription in the previous 12 months. Respondents with a long-term condition, on regular multiple medications, who have deafness or hearing loss and who are from the lowest deprivation quintile were more likely to have used online services. Male respondents (compared with females) and respondents with black and other ethnicity compared with white ethnicity were less likely to use online services. Respondents over 85 years old were less likely to use online appointment booking and online repeat prescription ordering compared with the younger age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific groups of respondents were more likely to use online services such as patients with long-term conditions or those with deafness or hearing loss. While online services could provide efficiency to patients and practices it is essential that alternatives continue to be provided to those that cannot use or choose not to use online services. Understanding the different patients' needs could inform solutions to increase the uptake and use of the services.

Digital Health Interventions to Improve Access to and Quality of Primary Health Care Services: A Scoping Review

Global digital technology advances offer the potential to enhance primary health care (PHC) quality, reach, and efficiency, driving toward universal health coverage (UHC). This scoping review explored how digital health solutions aid PHC delivery and UHC realization by examining the context, mechanisms, and outcomes of eHealth interventions. A comprehensive literature search was conducted, capturing qualitative and quantitative studies, process evaluations, and systematic or scoping reviews. Our analysis of 65 articles revealed that a well-functioning digital ecosystem-featuring adaptable, interoperable digital tools, robust Information and Communications Technology foundations, and enabling environments-is pivotal for eHealth interventions' success. Facilities with better digital literacy, motivated staff, and adequate funding demonstrated a higher adoption of eHealth technologies, leading to improved, coordinated service delivery and higher patient satisfaction. However, eHealth's potential is often restricted by existing socio-cultural norms, geographical inequities in technology access, and digital literacy disparities. Our review underscores the importance of considering the digital ecosystem's readiness, user behavior, broader health system requirements, and PHC capacity for adopting digital solutions while assessing digital health interventions' impact.

Consultation Rate and Mode by Deprivation in English General Practice From 2018 to 2022: Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on primary care service delivery with an increased use of remote consultations. With general practice delivering record numbers of appointments and rising concerns around access, funding, and staffing in the UK National Health Service, we assessed contemporary trends in consultation rate and modes (ie, face-to-face versus remote).

OBJECTIVE

This paper describes trends in consultation rates in general practice in England for key demographics before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore the use of remote and face-to-face consultations with regard to socioeconomic deprivation to understand the possible effect of changes in consultation modes on health inequalities.

METHODS

We did a retrospective analysis of 9,429,919 consultations by general practitioners, nurses, or other health care professionals between March 2018 and February 2022 for patients registered at 397 general practices in England. We used routine electronic health records from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum with linkage to national data sets. Negative binomial models were used to predict consultation rates and modes (ie, remote versus face-to-face) by age, sex, and socioeconomic deprivation over time.

RESULTS

Overall consultation rates increased by 15% from 4.92 in 2018-2019 to 5.66 in 2021-2022 with some fluctuation during the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The breakdown into face-to-face and remote consultations shows that the pandemic precipitated a rapid increase in remote consultations across all groups, but the extent varies by age. Consultation rates increased with increasing levels of deprivation. Socioeconomic differences in consultation rates, adjusted for sex and age, halved during the pandemic (from 0.36 to 0.18, indicating more consultations in the most deprived), effectively narrowing relative differences between deprivation quintiles. This trend remains when stratified by sex, but the difference across deprivation quintiles is smaller for men. The most deprived saw a relatively larger increase in remote and decrease in face-to-face consultation rates compared to the least deprived.

CONCLUSIONS

The substantial increases in consultation rates observed in this study imply an increased pressure on general practice. The narrowing of consultation rates between deprivation quintiles is cause for concern, given ample evidence that health needs are greater in more deprived areas.

Remote care in UK general practice: baseline data on 11 case studies

Background

Accessing and receiving care remotely (by telephone, video or online) became the default option during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but in-person care has unique benefits in some circumstances. We are studying UK general practices as they try to balance remote and in-person care, with recurrent waves of COVID-19 and various post-pandemic backlogs.

Methods

Mixed-methods (mostly qualitative) case study across 11 general practices. Researchers-in-residence have built relationships with practices and become familiar with their contexts and activities; they are following their progress for two years via staff and patient interviews, documents and ethnography, and supporting improvement efforts through co-design. In this paper, we report baseline data.

Results

Reflecting our maximum-variety sampling strategy, the 11 practices vary in size, setting, ethos, staffing, population demographics and digital maturity, but share common contextual features-notably system-level stressors such as high workload and staff shortages, and UK's technical and regulatory infrastructure. We have identified both commonalities and differences between practices in terms of how they: 1] manage the 'digital front door' (access and triage) and balance demand and capacity; 2] strive for high standards of quality and safety; 3] ensure digital inclusion and mitigate wider inequalities; 4] support and train their staff (clinical and non-clinical), students and trainees; 5] select, install, pilot and use technologies and the digital infrastructure which support them; and 6] involve patients in their improvement efforts.

Conclusions

General practices' responses to pandemic-induced disruptive innovation appear unique and situated. We anticipate that by focusing on depth and detail, this longitudinal study will throw light on why a solution that works well in one practice does not work at all in another. As the study unfolds, we will explore how practices achieve timely diagnosis of urgent or serious illness and manage continuity of care, long-term conditions and complex needs.

Remote care in UK general practice: baseline data on 11 case studies

BACKGROUND

Accessing and receiving care remotely (by telephone, video or online) became the default option during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but in-person care has unique benefits in some circumstances. We are studying UK general practices as they try to balance remote and in-person care, with recurrent waves of COVID-19 and various post-pandemic backlogs.

METHODS

Mixed-methods (mostly qualitative) case study across 11 general practices. Researchers-in-residence have built relationships with practices and become familiar with their contexts and activities; they are following their progress for two years via staff and patient interviews, documents and ethnography, and supporting improvement efforts through co-design. In this paper, we report baseline data.

RESULTS

Reflecting our maximum-variety sampling strategy, the 11 practices vary in size, setting, ethos, staffing, population demographics and digital maturity, but share common contextual features-notably system-level stressors such as high workload and staff shortages, and UK's technical and regulatory infrastructure. We have identified both commonalities and differences between practices in terms of how they: 1] manage the 'digital front door' (access and triage) and balance demand and capacity; 2] strive for high standards of quality and safety; 3] ensure digital inclusion and mitigate wider inequalities; 4] support and train their staff (clinical and non-clinical), students and trainees; 5] select, install, pilot and use technologies and the digital infrastructure which support them; and 6] involve patients in their improvement efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

General practices' responses to pandemic-induced disruptive innovation appear unique and situated. We anticipate that by focusing on depth and detail, this longitudinal study will throw light on why a solution that works well in one practice does not work at all in another. As the study unfolds, we will explore how practices achieve timely diagnosis of urgent or serious illness and manage continuity of care, long-term conditions and complex needs.

Communicating Effectively With People Experiencing Homelessness to Prevent Infectious Diseases

Background

People experiencing homelessness (PEH) are disproportionately affected by many infectious diseases, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, communication efforts during public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic often do not consider the unique needs of PEH. We examined how PEH seek and receive health information and how traditional health communication methods resonate with them.

Methods

We conducted in-person focus groups with PEH in 4 jurisdictions (Cincinnati, Ohio; Denver, Colorado; Sacramento, California; and the Bronx, New York) during July 2021.

Results

Findings from 15 focus groups with PEH (n = 53) revealed the need for trusted messengers and consistent messaging across local organizations, as PEH seek to verify information they receive from multiple sources. PEH overwhelmingly preferred to receive health information through face-to-face conversations, especially with healthcare providers with whom they had an established relationship, but they also cited news media, the internet, and social media as their main sources for obtaining health information. PEH reported that effective communication products pair a recommended action with instructions and resources about how to take that action within their community.

Conclusions

These findings support healthcare providers collaborating with public health agencies to ensure that infectious disease prevention messages for PEH are provided by trusted messengers, multimodal, paired with resources, and consistent.