Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add filters

Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
BMC Prim Care ; 23: 4, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1690969

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of chat-based digital visits (eVisits) to assess infectious symptoms in primary care is rapidly increasing. The "digi-physical" model of care uses eVisits as the first line of assessment while assuming a certain proportion of patients will inevitably need to be further assessed through urgent physical examination within 48 h. It is unclear to what extent this approach can mitigate physical visits compared to assessing patients directly using office visits. METHODS: This pre-COVID-19-pandemic observational study followed up "digi-physical" eVisit patients (n = 1188) compared to office visit patients (n = 599) with respiratory or urinary symptoms. Index visits occurred between March 30th 2016 and March 29th 2019. The primary outcome was subsequent physical visits to physicians within two weeks using registry data from Skåne county, Sweden (Region Skånes Vårddatabas, RSVD). RESULTS: No significant differences in subsequent physical visits within two weeks (excluding the first 48 h) were noted following "digi-physical" care compared to office visits (179 (18.0%) vs. 102 (17.6%), P = .854). As part of the "digital-physical" concept, a significantly larger proportion of eVisit patients had a physical visit within 48 h compared to corresponding office visit patients (191 (16.1%) vs. 19 (3.2%), P < .001), with 150 (78.5%) of these eVisit patients recommended some form of follow-up by the eVisit physician. CONCLUSIONS: Most eVisit patients (68.9%) with respiratory and urinary symptoms have no subsequent physical visits. Beyond an unavoidable portion of patients requiring urgent physical examination within 48 h, "digi-physical" management of respiratory and urinary symptoms results in comparable subsequent health care utilization compared to office visits. eVisit providers may need to optimize use of resources to minimize the proportion of patients being assessed both digitally and physically within 48 h as part of the "digi-physical" concept. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03474887. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01618-2.

2.
International journal of general medicine ; 14:9237-9246, 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1562914

ABSTRACT

Purpose The primary care physician’s traditional patient contacts are challenged by the rapidly accelerating digital transformation. In a quantitative survey analysis based on the theory of planned behavior, we found high behavioral intention to use telemedicine among Swedish primary care physicians, but low reported use. The aim of this study was to further examine the physicians’ experiences regarding telemedicine, with a focus on possible explanations for the gap between intention and use, through analysis of the free-text comments supplied in the survey. Material and Methods The material was collected through a web-based survey which was sent out to physicians at 160 primary health care centers in southern Sweden from May to August 2019. The survey covered four areas: general experiences of telemedicine, digital contacts, chronic disease monitoring with digital tools, and artificial intelligence. A total of 100 physicians submitted one or more free-text comments. These were analyzed using qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach. Results The primary care physicians expressed attitudes towards telemedicine that focused on clinical usefulness. Barriers to use were the loss of personal contact with patients and a deficient technological infrastructure. The major concerns were that these factors would result in patient harm and an increased workload. The connection between intention and use postulated by the theory of planned behavior was not applicable in this context, as external factors in the form of availability and clinical usefulness of the specific technology were major impediments to use despite a generally positive attitude. Conclusion All telemedicine tools must be evaluated regarding clinical usefulness, patient safety, and effects on staff workload, and end users should be included in this process. Utmost consideration is needed regarding how to retain the benefits of personal contact between patient and provider when digital solutions are introduced.

3.
JMIR Hum Factors ; 9(1): e33034, 2022 Feb 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1542268

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Remote assessment of respiratory tract infections (RTIs) has been a controversial topic during the fast development of private telemedicine providers in Swedish primary health care. The possibility to unburden the traditional care has been put against a questionable quality of care as well as risks of increased utilization and costs. The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to a changed management of patient care to decrease viral spread, with an expected shift in contact types from in-person to remote ones. OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to compare health care consumption and type of contacts (in-person or remote) for RTIs before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The second aim was to study whether the number of follow-up contacts after an index contact for RTIs changed during the study period, and whether the number of follow-up contacts differed if the index contact was in-person or remote. A third aim was to study whether the pattern of follow-up contacts differed depending on whether the index contact was with a traditional or a private telemedicine provider. METHODS: The study design was an observational retrospective analysis with a description of all index contacts and follow-up contacts with physicians in primary care and emergency rooms in a Swedish region (Skåne) for RTIs including patients of all ages and comparison for the same periods in 2018, 2019, and 2020. RESULTS: Compared with 2018 and 2019, there were fewer index contacts for RTIs per 1000 inhabitants in 2020. By contrast, the number of follow-up contacts, both per 1000 inhabitants and per index contact, was higher in 2020. The composition of both index and follow-up contacts changed as the share of remote contacts, in particular for traditional care providers, increased. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, fewer index contacts for RTIs but more follow-up contacts were conducted, compared with 2018-2019. The share of both index and follow-up contacts that were conducted remotely increased. Further studies are needed to study the reasons behind the increase in remote contacts, and if it will last after the pandemic, and more clinical guidelines for remote assessments of RTI are warranted.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL