Patient and Therapist Perceptions of a Publicly Funded Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (iCBT) Program for Ontario Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

To address the anticipated rise in mental health symptoms experienced at the population level during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ontario government provided 2 therapist-assisted internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) programs to adults free of charge at the point of service.

OBJECTIVE

The study aims to explore the facilitators of and barriers to implementing iCBT at the population level in Ontario, Canada, from the perspective of patients and therapists to better understand how therapist-assisted iCBT programs can be effectively implemented at the population level and inform strategies for enhancing service delivery and integration into the health care system.

METHODS

Using a convenience sampling methodology, semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 therapists who delivered iCBT and 20 patients who received iCBT through either of the publicly funded programs to explore their perspectives of the program. Interview data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis to generate themes.

RESULTS

Six salient themes were identified. Facilitators included the therapist-assisted nature of the program; the ease of registration and the lack of cost; and the feasibility of completing the psychoeducational modules given the online and self-paced nature of the program. Barriers included challenges with the online remote modality for developing the therapeutic alliance; the program's generalized nature, which limited customization to individual needs; and a lack of formal integration between the iCBT program and the health care system.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the program was generally well-received by patients and therapists due to its accessibility and feasibility, the digital format of the program presented both benefits and unique challenges. Strategies for improving the quality of service delivery include opportunities for synchronous communication between therapists and patients, options for increased customization, and the formal integration of iCBT into a broader stepped-care model that centralizes patient referrals between care providers and promotes continuity of care.

Mapping Theories, Models, and Frameworks to Evaluate Digital Health Interventions: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Digital health interventions (DHIs) are a central focus of health care transformation efforts, yet their uptake in practice continues to fall short of their potential. In order to achieve their desired outcomes and impact, DHIs need to reach their target population and need to be used. Many factors can rapidly intersect between this dynamic of users and interventions. The application of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) can facilitate the systematic understanding and explanation of the complex interactions between users, practices, technology, and health system factors that underpin research questions. There remains a gap in our understanding of how TMFs have been applied to guide the evaluation of DHIs with real-world health system operations.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to map TMFs used in studies to guide the evaluation of DHIs. The objectives are to (1) describe the TMFs and the constructs they target, (2) identify how TMFs have been prospectively used (ie, their roles) in primary studies to evaluate DHIs, and (3) to reflect on the relevance and utility of our findings for knowledge users.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted in partnership with knowledge users using an integrated knowledge translation approach. We included papers (eg, reports; empirical quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies; conference proceedings; and dissertations) if primary insights resulting from the application of TMFs were presented. Any type of DHI was eligible. Papers published from 2000 and onward were mainly identified from the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (Ovid), EBM Reviews (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid).

RESULTS

A total of 156 studies published between 2000 and 2022 were included. A total of 68 distinct TMFs were identified across 85 individual studies. In more than half (85/156, 55%) of the included studies, 1 of following 6 prevailing TMFs were reported: Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (n=39); the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Framework (n=17); the Technology of Acceptance Model (n=16); the Unified Theory on Acceptance and Use of Technology (n=12); the Diffusion of Innovation Theory (n=10); and Normalization Process Theory (n=9). The most common intended roles of the 6 TMFs were to inform data collection (n=86), to inform data analysis (n=69), and to identify key constructs that may serve as barriers and facilitators (n=52).

CONCLUSIONS

As TMFs are most often reported to be applied to support data collection and analysis, researchers should consider more clearly synthesizing key insights as practical use cases to both increase the relevance and digestibility of their findings. There is also a need to adapt or develop guidelines for better reporting DHIs and the use of TMFs to guide evaluation. Hence, it would contribute to ensuring ongoing technology transformation efforts are evidence and theory informed rather than anecdotally driven.

Quality of virtual care for ambulatory care sensitive conditions: Patient and provider experiences

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic and the need for physical distancing has led to rapid uptake of virtual visits to deliver ambulatory health care. Despite widespread adoption, there has been limited evaluation of the quality of care being delivered through virtual modalities for ambulatory care sensitive conditions (ACSCs).

Objective

To characterize patients’ and providers’ experiences with the quality and sustainability of virtual care for ACSCs.

Design

This was a multi-method study utilizing quantitative and qualitative data from patient surveys, provider surveys, and provider focus groups at a large academic ambulatory care hospital between May 2020 and June 2021. We included patients and providers utilizing telephone or video visits for the following ACSCs: hypertension, angina, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or asthma.

Main measures

Quantitative and qualitative patient and provider survey responses were mapped to the Six Domains of Healthcare Quality framework. Provider focus groups were coded to identify themes within each quality domain.

Key results

Surveys were completed by 110/352 (31%) consenting patients and 20/61 (33%) providers. 5 provider focus groups were held with 14 participants. Patients found virtual visits to be generally more convenient than in-person visits for ACSCs. The perceived effectiveness of virtual visits was dependent on the clinical and social complexity of individual encounters. Respondents reported difficulty forming effective patient-provider relationships in the virtual environment. Patients and providers felt that virtual care has potential to both alleviate and exacerbate structural barriers to equitable access to care.

Conclusions

In a large academic ambulatory care hospital, patients and providers experienced the quality of virtual visits for the management of ACSCs to be variable depending on the biopsychosocial complexity of the individual encounter. Our findings in each quality domain highlight key considerations for patients, providers and institutions to uphold the quality of virtual care for ACSCs.

Implementation and Evaluation of COVIDCare@Home, a Family Medicine Led Remote Monitoring Program for COVID-19 Patients: a multi-method cross-sectional study

Background

COVIDCare@Home (CC@H) is a multifaceted, interprofessional team-based remote monitoring program led by family medicine for patients diagnosed with COVID-19, based at Women’s College Hospital (WCH), an ambulatory academic center in Toronto, Canada. CC@H offers virtual visits (phone and video) to address the clinical needs and broader social determinants of the health of patients during the acute phase of COVID-19 infection, including finding a primary care provider (PCP) and support for food insecurity.

Objective

The objective of this evaluation is to understand the implementation and quality outcomes of CC@H within the Quadruple Aim framework of patient experience, provider experience, cost, and population health.

Methods

This multimethod cross-sectional evaluation follows the Quadruple Aim framework to focus on implementation and service quality outcomes, including feasibility, adoption, safety, effectiveness, equity, and patient centeredness. These measures were explored using clinical and service utilization data, patient experience data (an online survey and a postdischarge questionnaire), provider experience data (surveys, interviews, and focus groups), and stakeholder interviews. Descriptive analysis was conducted for surveys and utilization data. Deductive analysis was conducted for interviews and focus groups, mapping to implementation and quality domains. The Ontario Marginalization Index (ON-Marg) measured the proportion of underserved patients accessing CC@H.

Results

In total, 3412 visits were conducted in the first 8 months of the program (April 8-December 8, 2020) for 616 discrete patients, including 2114 (62.0%) visits with family physician staff/residents and 149 (4.4%) visits with social workers/mental health professionals. There was a median of 5 (IQR 4) visits per patient, with a median follow-up of 7 days (IQR 27). The net promoter score was 77. In addition, 144 (23.3%) of the patients were in the most marginalized populations based on the residential postal code (as per ON-Marg). Interviews with providers and stakeholders indicated that the program continued to adapt to meet the needs of patients and the health care system.

Conclusions

Future remote monitoring should integrate support for addressing the social determinants of health and ensure patient-centered care through comprehensive care teams.

Multiple sclerosis clinical practice guidelines provide few complementary and alternative medicine recommendations: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is prevalent among individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS), yet the quantity and quality of CAM recommendations in MS clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) has not been assessed. The objective of this study was to determine the mention of CAM in MS CPGs and assess the quality of CAM recommendations.

DESIGN/SETTING

A systematic review was conducted to identify MS CPGs. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from 2008 to 2018. The Guidelines International Network and the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) websites were also searched. Eligible CPGs containing CAM recommendations published by non-profit agencies on the treatment of MS for adults were assessed for quality and reporting using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument.

OUTCOME/RESULTS

From 204 unique search results, six CPGs mentioned CAM and four made CAM recommendations. Scaled domain percentages from highest to lowest were clarity of presentation (90.3 % Overall, 83.3 % CAM), scope and purpose (87.5 % Overall, 86.8 % CAM), rigour of development (80.0 % Overall, 61.7 % CAM), applicability (55.2 % Overall, 44.3 % CAM), editorial independence (49.0 % Overall, 47.9 % CAM), and stakeholder involvement (55.6 % Overall, 39.6 % CAM). Quality varied within and across CPGs. Three of the four CPGs were recommended by both appraisers; one was recommended as "No" or "Yes with modifications".

CONCLUSION

CAM recommendations were only present in one third of all eligible CPGs. CPGs that scored highly can be used by patients and healthcare professionals as the basis for discussion about the use of CAM therapies for MS treatment/management. Although many people living with MS (PwMS) seek CAM therapies, few CPGs are available to provide guidance for clinicians and patients.

Identifying optimal frameworks to implement or evaluate digital health interventions: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Digital health interventions (DHIs) are defined as health services delivered electronically through formal or informal care. DHIs can range from electronic medical records used by providers to mobile health apps used by consumers. DHIs involve complex interactions between user, technology and the healthcare team, posing challenges for implementation and evaluation. Theoretical or interpretive frameworks are crucial in providing researchers guidance and clarity on implementation or evaluation approaches; however, there is a lack of standardisation on which frameworks to use in which contexts. Our goal is to conduct a scoping review to identify frameworks to guide the implementation or evaluation of DHIs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A scoping review will be conducted using methods outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers' manual and will conform to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. Studies will be included if they report on frameworks (ie, theoretical, interpretive, developmental) that are used to guide either implementation or evaluation of DHIs. Electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsychINFO will be searched in addition to grey literature and reference lists of included studies. Citations and full text articles will be screened independently in Covidence after a reliability check among reviewers. We will use qualitative description to summarise findings and focus on how research objectives and type of DHIs are aligned with the frameworks used.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We engaged an advisory panel of digital health knowledge users to provide input at strategic stages of the scoping review to enhance the relevance of findings and inform dissemination activities. Specifically, they will provide feedback on the eligibility criteria, data abstraction elements, interpretation of findings and assist in developing key messages for dissemination. This study does not require ethical review. Findings from review will support decision making when selecting appropriate frameworks to guide the implementation or evaluation of DHIs.

Utility and Perceived Value of a Provincial Digital Diagnostic Imaging Repository: Multimethod Study

Background

Timely and comprehensive diagnostic image sharing across institutional and regional boundaries can produce multiple benefits while supporting integrated models of care. In Ontario, Canada, the Diagnostic Imaging Common Service (DICS) was created as a centralized imaging repository to enable the sharing and viewing of diagnostic images and associated reports across hospital-based and community-based clinicians throughout the province.

Objective

The aims of this study were as follows: (1) to explore real-world utilization and perceived clinical value of the DICS following the provision of system-wide access and (2) to identify strategies to optimize the technology platform functionality and encourage adoption.

Methods

This multimethod study included semistructured interviews with physicians and administrative stakeholders and descriptive analysis of the current DICS usage data.

Results

In this study, 41 participants were interviewed, that is, 34 physicians and 7 administrative stakeholders. The following 4 key themes emerged: (1) utilization of the DICS depended on the awareness of the technology and the preferred channels for accessing images, which varied widely, (2) clinical responsibilities and available institutional resources were the drivers of utilization (or lack thereof), (3) centralized image repositories were perceived to offer value at the patient, clinician, and health care system levels, and (4) the enabling factors to realize value included aspects of technology infrastructure (ie, available functionality) alongside policy supports. High-volume DICS usage was not evenly distributed throughout the province.

Conclusions

Suboptimal adoption of the DICS was driven by poor awareness and variations in the clinical workflow. Alignment with physician workflow, policy supports, and investment in key technological features and infrastructure would improve functionality and data comprehensiveness, thereby optimizing health system performance, patient and provider experience, population health, and health care costs.