ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This study investigated how patients with COVID-19, telemonitoring (TM) teams, general practitioners (GPs) and primary care nurses in Belgium experienced remote patient monitoring (RPM) in 12 healthcare organizations, in relation to the patients' illness, health, and care needs, perceived quality of care, patient and health system outcomes, and implementation challenges. DESIGN: A qualitative research approach was adopted, including focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews. METHODS: Four different groups of participants were interviewed, that is, patients (n = 17), TM teams (n = 27), GPs (n = 16), and primary care nurses (n = 12). An interview guide was drafted based on a literature review. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and NVivo was used for managing and analyzing the data. The QUAGOL method was used to guide the data analysis process and was adapted for the purpose of a thematic content analysis. RESULTS: All participants agreed that RPM-reassured patients. The overall perceived value of RPM for individual patients depended on how well the intervention matched with their needs. Patients who did not have the necessary language (Dutch/French speaking) and digital skills, who did not have the right equipment (smartphone or tablet), or who missed the necessary infrastructure (no internet coverage in their region) were often excluded. Remote patient monitoring also reassured healthcare professionals as it gave them information on a disease they had little knowledge about. Professionals involved in RPM experienced a high workload. All TM teams agreed that quality of data was a key factor to ensure an adequate follow-up, but they differed in what they found important. The logistic management of RPM was a challenge because of the contagious character of COVID-19, and the need for an effective information flow between the hospital team and primary care providers. Participants missed clarification about who was accountable for the care for patients in the projects. Primary care nurses and GPs missed access to RPM data. All agreed that the funding they received was not sufficient to cover all the costs associated with RPM. CONCLUSION: Healthcare professionals and patients perceive RPM as valuable and believe that the concept will have its place in the Belgium health system. However, current RPM practice is challenged by many barriers, and the sustainability of RPM implementation is low. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) was perceived as a valuable intervention for patients with COVID-19, but there were important concerns about unequal access to care. While the technology for RPM is available, the sustainability of implementation is low because of concerns with data quality, challenging logistics within projects, lack of data integration and communication, and a lack of an overarching guiding framework.
ABSTRACT
Chronic hospital nurse understaffing is a pre-existing condition of the COVID-19 pandemic. With nurses on the frontline against the pandemic, safe nurse staffing in hospitals is high on the political agenda of the responsible ministers of Health. This paper presents a recent Belgian policy reform to improve nurse staffing levels. Although the reform was initiated before the pandemic, its roll-out took place from 2020 onwards. Through a substantial increase of the hospital budget, policy makers envisaged to improve patient-to-nurse ratios. Yet, this ambition was considerably toned down during the implementation. Due to a shortage of nurses in the labour market, hospital associations successfully lobbied to allocate part of the budget to hire non-nursing staff. Moreover, other healthcare settings claimed their share of the pie. Elements of international best-practice examples such as ward managers supernumerary to the team and increasing the transparency on staffing decisions were adopted. Other measures, such as mandated patient-to-nurse ratios, nurse staffing committees, or the monitoring or public reporting of ratios, were not retained. Additional measures were taken to safeguard that bedside staffing levels would improve, such as the requirement to demonstrate a net increase in staff to obtain additional budget, staffing plan's approval by local work councils and recommendation to base staff allocation on patient acuity measures. This policy process makes clear that the engagement of budgets is only a first step towards safe staffing levels, which needs to be embedded in a comprehensive policy plan. Future evaluation of bedside nurse staffing levels and nurse wellbeing is needed to conclude about the effectiveness of these measures and the intended and unintended effects they provoked.