Dataset Information

Patient Perspectives on Using Telemedicine During In-Center Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale & objective

In the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the United States federal government expanded originating telemedicine sites to include outpatient dialysis units. For the first time, nephrology practitioners across the United States could replace face-to-face visits with telemedicine for patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. This study describes patients' perspectives on the use of telemedicine during in-center hemodialysis.

Study design

A qualitative study.

Setting & participants

Thirty-two patients from underserved populations (older, less educated, unemployed, persons of color) receiving in-center hemodialysis who used telemedicine with their nephrologist during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Analytical approach

Telephone semistructured interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. Transcripts were thematically analyzed.

Results

We identified 6 themes with subthemes: adapting to telemedicine (gaining familiarity and confidence, overcoming and resolving technical difficulties, and relying on staff for communication); ensuring availability of the physician (enabling an immediate response to urgent medical needs, providing peace of mind, addressing patient needs adequately, and enhanced attention and contact from physicians); safeguarding against infection (limiting COVID-19 exposures and decreasing use); straining communication and physical interactions (loss of personalized touch, limited physical examination, and unable to reapproach physicians about forgotten issues); maintaining privacy (enhancing privacy and projecting voice enables others to hear); and supporting confidence in telemedicine (requiring established rapport with physicians, clinical stabilty of health, and ability to have in-person visits when necessary).

Limitations

Interviews were conducted later in the pandemic when some nephrology care providers were using telemedicine infrequently.

Conclusions

Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis adapted to telemedicine visits by their nephrologists in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and observed its benefits. However, further considerations regarding communication, privacy, and physical assessments are necessary. Integrating telemedicine into future in-center hemodialysis care using a hybrid approach could potentially build trust, optimize communication, and augment care.

SUBMITTER: Haltom TM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11209005 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Patient Perspectives on Using Telemedicine During In-Center Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study.

Haltom Trenton M TM Lew Susie Q SQ Winkelmayer Wolfgang C WC Chertow Glenn M GM Jaure Allison A Erickson Kevin F KF

Kidney medicine 20240522 7

<h4>Rationale & objective</h4>In the wake of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the United States federal government expanded originating telemedicine sites to include outpatient dialysis units. For the first time, nephrology practitioners across the United States could replace face-to-face visits with telemedicine for patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. This study describes patients' perspectives on the use of telemedicine during in-center hemodialysis.<h4>Study design</h4 ...[more]

PMID: 38938646

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic notably disrupted care for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) care, necessitating a rapid shift to telemedicine. Despite the growing use of telemedicine, the impact of this transition on patients' experiences, particularly in Canada and considering sociocultural factors, remains underexplored. This study aims to investigate patients with CKD perspectives on telemedicine versus in-person care and to offer recommendations for enhancing telemedicine services.ObjectiveThe objective was to understand patients with CKD views on telemedicine clinics during the pandemic compared to traditional in-person clinics.DesignThis was a qualitative descriptive study employing semi-structured interviews.SettingThis study was conducted in general nephrology and multidisciplinary kidney care clinics in London, Canada.PopulationThe study population was English-speaking patients with CKD with at least one in-person nephrology visit before March 15, 2020, and one telemedicine appointment after March 30, 2020.MethodsInterviews were conducted using a structured guide, with transcripts analyzed line-by-line by 3 independent reviewers through directed content analysis. Themes were identified and agreed upon through group consensus.ResultsInterviews with 12 participants revealed 5 key themes: (1) convenience; (2) building connection and trust; (3) necessity of in-person care; (4) role of family or caregivers; and (5) preferences for clinic types. Most participants (11/12) valued the convenience of telemedicine, noting similar levels of care compared to in-person visits. However, they found it easier to establish personal connections in face-to-face appointments. Most (8/12) preferred in-person visits if their condition worsened. Overall, a combination of in-person and telemedicine was favored, with a preference for video over telephone.LimitationsThe study's focus on one academic nephrology center in Ontario and predominantly white participants limits broader applicability. Additionally, recall bias may affect the findings due to the interview-based design.ConclusionsTelemedicine will remain integral to CKD care, with a hybrid model combining in-person and telemedicine preferred. Integrating patient feedback into future telemedicine practices is essential to enhance flexibility, access, and patient satisfaction.

Project description:BackgroundTelemedicine has been adopted in the inpatient setting to facilitate clinical interactions between on-site clinicians and isolated hospitalized patients. Such remote interactions have the potential to reduce pathogen exposure and use of personal protective equipment but may also pose new safety concerns given prior evidence that isolated patients can receive suboptimal care. Formal evaluations of the use and practical acceptance of inpatient telemedicine among hospitalized patients are lacking.ObjectiveWe aimed to evaluate the experience of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with inpatient telemedicine introduced as an infection control measure during the pandemic.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative evaluation in a COVID-19 designated non-intensive care hospital unit at a large academic health center (Stanford Health Care) from October 2020 through January 2021. Semistructured qualitative interviews focused on patient experience, impact on quality of care, communication, and mental health. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants representing diversity across varying demographics until thematic saturation was reached. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using an inductive-deductive approach.ResultsInterviews with 20 hospitalized patients suggested that nonemergency clinical care and bridging to in-person care comprised the majority of inpatient telemedicine use. Nurses were reported to enter the room and call on the tablet far more frequently than physicians, who typically entered the room at least daily. Patients reported broad acceptance of the technology, citing improved convenience and reduced anxiety, but preferred in-person care where possible. Quality of care was believed to be similar to in-person care with the exception of a few patients who wanted more frequent in-person examinations. Ongoing challenges included low audio volume, shifting tablet location, and inconsistent verbal introductions from the clinical team.ConclusionsPatient experiences with inpatient telemedicine were largely favorable. Although most patients expressed a preference for in-person care, telemedicine was acceptable given the circumstances associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Improvements in technical and care team use may enhance acceptability. Further evaluation is needed to understand the impact of inpatient telemedicine and the optimal balance between in-person and virtual care in the hospital setting.

Project description:BackgroundGeneralized restriction of movement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, together with unprecedented pressure on the health system, has disrupted routine care for non-COVID-19 patients. Telemedicine should be vigorously promoted to reduce the risk of infections and to offer medical assistance to restricted patients.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to understand physicians' attitudes toward and perspectives of telemedicine during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, in order to provide support for better implementation of telemedicine.MethodsWe surveyed all physicians (N=148), from October 17 to 25, 2020, who attended the clinical informatics PhD program at West China Medical School, Sichuan University, China. The physicians came from 57 hospitals in 16 provinces (ie, municipalities) across China, 54 of which are 3A-level hospitals, two are 3B-level hospitals, and one is a 2A-level hospital.ResultsAmong 148 physicians, a survey response rate of 87.2% (129/148) was attained. The average age of the respondents was 35.6 (SD 3.9) years (range 23-48 years) and 67 out of 129 respondents (51.9%) were female. The respondents come from 37 clinical specialties in 55 hospitals located in 14 provinces (ie, municipalities) across Eastern, Central, and Western China. A total of 94.6% (122/129) of respondents' hospitals had adopted a telemedicine system; however, 34.1% (44/129) of the physicians had never used a telemedicine system and only 9.3% (12/129) used one frequently (≥1 time/week). A total of 91.5% (118/129) and 88.4% (114/129) of physicians were willing to use telemedicine during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, respectively. Physicians considered the inability to examine patients in person to be the biggest concern (101/129, 78.3%) and the biggest barrier (76/129, 58.9%) to implementing telemedicine.ConclusionsTelemedicine is not yet universally available for all health care needs and has not been used frequently by physicians in this study. However, the willingness of physicians to use telemedicine was high. Telemedicine still has many problems to overcome.

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are standardized instruments used for assessing patients' perspectives on their health status at a point in time, including their health-related quality of life, symptoms, functionality, and physical, mental, and social wellbeing. For people with kidney failure receiving hemodialysis, addressing high symptom burden and complexity relies on care team members integrating their expertise to achieve common management goals. In the context of a program-wide initiative integrating PROMs into routine hemodialysis care, we aimed to explore patients' and clinicians' perspectives on the role of PROMs in supporting interdisciplinary symptom management.MethodsWe employed a qualitative descriptive approach using semi-structured interviews and observations. Eligible participants included adult patients receiving intermittent, outpatient hemodialysis for > 3 months, their informal caregivers, and hemodialysis clinicians (i.e., nurses, nephrologists, and allied health professionals) in Southern Alberta, Canada. Guided by thematic analysis, team members coded transcripts in duplicate and developed themes iteratively through review, refinement, and discussion.ResultsThirty-three clinicians (22 nurses, 6 nephrologists, 5 allied health professionals), 20 patients, and one caregiver participated in this study. Clinicians described using PROMs to coordinate care across provider types using the resources available in their units, whereas patients tended to focus on the perceived impact of this concerted care on symptom trajectory and care experience. We identified 3 overarching themes with subthemes related to the role of PROMs in interdisciplinary symptom management in this setting: (1) Integrating care for interrelated symptoms ("You need a team", conducive setting, role clarity and collaboration); (2) Streamlining information sharing and access (symptom data repository, common language for coordinated care); (3) Reshaping expectations (expectations for follow-up, managing symptom persistence).ConclusionsWe found that use of PROMs in routine hemodialysis care highlighted symptom interrelatedness and complexity and helped to streamline involvement of the interdisciplinary care team. Issues such as role flexibility and resource constraints may influence sustainability of routine PROM use in the outpatient hemodialysis setting.

Project description:BackgroundDetailed community-based perspectives on patient experiences with telemedicine are currently lacking, yet essential to assess clinical applicability of telemedicine during and beyond pandemics, alike COVID-19. The aim of this study was to expose patient perspectives on virtual compared to in-person consultations, including determinants of these preferences.MethodsWe invited 5864 participants of the population-based Rotterdam Study to fill in a validated questionnaire using both close-ended and free-text questions. The questionnaire was sent on 30 July 2020, following a period of lockdowns and closures of non-essential workplaces. It assessed preferences for physician contact, healthcare utilisation, socioeconomic factors, and overall health. Those who experienced at least one virtual consultation (telephone or video call) between March 2020 and the beginning of July 2020 were asked whether those consultations were more, equally or less pleasant than in-person consultations, and to detail their experiences through free-text comments. These narrative data were examined using thematic analysis.Results4514 participants completed the questionnaire (response rate 77.0%, 58.7% women, mean age 70.8 ± 10.5 years). 1103 participants (24.4%) reported having had experience with virtual consultations. Half of these participants considered virtual consultations less pleasant than in-person consultations (N = 556; 50.4%), while 11.5% found it more pleasant. In total, we coded free-text comments of 752 participants. Prominent themes behind patient preferences for virtual or in-person consultations were lack of nonverbal communication, lack of physical examination, consultation scheduling, personal circumstances, and the presence of somatic and/or language barriers.ConclusionsBased on the experiences of a large elderly patient population, we showed that preference for virtual or in-person consultations is dependent on personal and situational variety, and their interplay. Healthcare providers should consider patients' complex care needs and evaluate the potential added value of nonverbal communication and physical examination before scheduling a virtual consultation.

Dataset Information

Patient Perspectives on Using Telemedicine During In-Center Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study.

Rationale & objective

Study design

Setting & participants

Analytical approach

Results

Limitations

Conclusions

Publications

Patient Perspectives on Using Telemedicine During In-Center Hemodialysis: A Qualitative Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets