Protocol: How can people with social care needs be supported through processes of digital care navigation to access remote primary care? A multi-site case study in UK general practice of remote care as the ‘new normal'

Background: Care navigation refers to support for patients accessing primary care and other related services. The expansion of digitally enabled care in the UK since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a greater need for digital care navigation: supporting people to access primary care digitally and, if necessary, to help them find alternative non-digital routes of access. Support to patients with social care needs (including but not limited to those who are homeless and insecurely housed, living in residential care and supported by domiciliary carers) increasingly involves work to navigate primary care provided remotely and accessed digitally. There is little knowledge about how this work is being done. Methods: Care Navigation involves embedded researchers identifying digital care navigation for patients accessing services in 11 GP practices recruited to a linked study of remote primary care ( Remote care as the ‘new normal?' ). Digital care navigation will be studied through go-along (in-person or remote) interviews with a sample of 20 people offering formal (paid or voluntary) support, 6 national and regional stakeholders who plan, commission or provide digital care navigation and a focus group with 12 social prescribers engaged in digital care navigation. A co-design workshop with people working in, or commissioning, social care settings will consider how findings can inform improved digital care navigation, for example through the development of resources or guidance for care navigators. Results: (anticipated): Findings are anticipated to include evidence of how digital care navigation is practised, the work that is done to support patients in accessing remote primary care, and how this work is shaped by material resources and variations in the configuration of services and infrastructure. Conclusions: : New explanations of the work needed to navigate digital care will inform policy and service developments aimed at helping patients benefit from remote primary care.

Clinical risk in remote consultations in general practice: findings from in-COVID-19 pandemic qualitative research.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic-related rise in remote consulting raises questions about the nature and type of risks in remote general practice. AIM: To develop an empirically based and theory-informed taxonomy of risks associated with remote consultations. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative sub-study of data selected from the wider datasets of three large, multi-site, mixed-method studies of remote care in general practice before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups, with a total of 176 clinicians and 43 patients. Data were analysed thematically, taking account of an existing framework of domains of clinical risk. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic brought changes to estates (for example, how waiting rooms were used), access pathways, technologies, and interpersonal interactions. Six domains of risk were evident in relation to the following: (1) practice set-up and organisation (including digital inequalities of access, technology failure, and reduced service efficiency); (2) communication and the clinical relationship (including a shift to more transactional consultations); (3) quality of clinical care (including missed diagnoses, safeguarding challenges, over-investigation, and over-treatment); (4) increased burden on the patient (for example, to self-examine and navigate between services); (5) reduced opportunities for screening and managing the social determinants of health; and (6) workforce (including increased clinician stress and fewer opportunities for learning). CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding potential benefits, if remote consultations are to work safely, risks must be actively mitigated by measures that include digital inclusion strategies, enhanced safety-netting, and training and support for staff.

Desperately Seeking Intersectionality in Digital Health Disparity Research: Narrative Review to Inform a Richer Theorization of Multiple Disadvantage.

BACKGROUND: Digital consultations between patients and clinicians increased markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic, raising questions about equity. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review the literature on how multiple disadvantage-specifically, older age, lower socioeconomic status, and limited English proficiency-has been conceptualized, theorized, and studied empirically in relation to digital consultations. We focused mainly on video consultations as they have wider disparities than telephone consultations and relevant data on e-consultations are sparse. METHODS: Using keyword and snowball searching, we identified relevant papers published between 2012 and 2022 using Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and PubMed. The first search was completed in July 2022. Papers meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed thematically and summarized, and their key findings were tabulated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research criteria. Explanations for digital disparities were critically examined, and a search was undertaken in October 2022 to identify theoretical lenses on multiple disadvantage. RESULTS: Of 663 articles from the initial search, 27 (4.1%) met our inclusion criteria. In total, 37% (10/27) were commentaries, and 63% (17/27) were peer-reviewed empirical studies (11/27, 41% quantitative; 5/27, 19% qualitative; 1/27, 4% mixed methods; 1/27, 4% systematic reviews; and 1/27, 4% narrative reviews). Empirical studies were mostly small, rapidly conducted, and briefly reported. Most studies (25/27, 93%) identified marked digital disparities but lacked a strong theoretical lens. Proposed solutions focused on identifying and removing barriers, but the authors generally overlooked the pervasive impact of multiple layers of disadvantage. The data set included no theoretically informed studies that examined how different dimensions of disadvantage combined to affect digital health disparities. In our subsequent search, we identified 3 theoretical approaches that might help account for these digital disparities. Fundamental cause theory by Link and Phelan addresses why the association between socioeconomic status and health is pervasive and persists over time. Digital capital theory by Ragnedda and Ruiu explains how people mobilize resources to participate in digitally mediated activities and services. Intersectionality theory by Crenshaw states that systems of oppression are inherently bound together, creating singular social experiences for people who bear the force of multiple adverse social structures. CONCLUSIONS: A limitation of our initial sample was the sparse and undertheorized nature of the primary literature. The lack of attention to how digital health disparities emerge and play out both within and across categories of disadvantage means that solutions proposed to date may be oversimplistic and insufficient. Theories of multiple disadvantage have bearing on digital health, and there may be others of relevance besides those discussed in this paper. We call for greater interdisciplinary dialogue between theoretical research on multiple disadvantage and empirical studies on digital health disparities.

The Role of Information Infrastructures in Scaling up Video Consultations During COVID-19: Mixed Methods Case Study Into Opportunity, Disruption, and Exposure.

BACKGROUND: Until COVID-19, implementation and uptake of video consultations in health care was slow. However, the pandemic created a "burning platform" for scaling up such services. As health care organizations look to expand and maintain the use of video in the "new normal," it is important to understand infrastructural influences and changes that emerged during the pandemic and that may influence sustainability going forward. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to draw lessons from 4 National Health Service (NHS) organizations on how information infrastructures shaped, and were shaped by, the rapid scale-up of video consultations during COVID-19. METHODS: A mixed methods case study of 4 NHS trusts in England was conducted before and during the pandemic. Data comprised 90 interviews with 49 participants (eg, clinicians, managers, administrators, and IT support), ethnographic field notes, and video consultation activity data. We sought examples of infrastructural features and challenges related to the rapid scale-up of video. Analysis was guided by Gkeredakis et al's 3 perspectives on crisis and digital change: as opportunity (for accelerated innovation and removal of barriers to experimentation), disruption (to organizational practices, generating new dependencies and risks), and exposure (of vulnerabilities in both people and infrastructure). RESULTS: Before COVID-19, there was a strong policy push for video consultations as a way of delivering health care efficiently. However, the spread of video was slow, and adopting clinicians described their use as ad hoc rather than business as usual. When the pandemic hit, video was rapidly scaled up. The most rapid increase in use was during the first month of the pandemic (March-April 2020), from an average of 8 video consultations per week to 171 per week at each site. Uptake continued to increase during the pandemic, averaging approximately 800 video consultations per week by March 2021. From an opportunity perspective, participants talked about changes to institutional elements of infrastructure, which had historically restricted the introduction and use of video. This was supported by an "organizing vision" for video, bringing legitimacy and support. Perspectives on disruption centered on changes to social, technical, and material work environments and the emergence of new patterns of action. Retaining positive elements of such change required a judicious balance between managerial (top-down) and emergent (bottom-up) approaches. Perspectives on exposure foregrounded social and technical impediments to video consulting. This highlighted the need to attend to the materiality and dependability of the installed base, as well as the social and cultural context of use. CONCLUSIONS: For sustained adoption at scale, health care organizations need to enable incremental systemic change and flexibility through agile governance and knowledge transfer pathways, support process multiplicity within virtual clinic workflows, attend to the materiality and dependability of the IT infrastructure within and beyond organizational boundaries, and maintain an overall narrative within which the continued use of video can be framed.

Theorising the shift to video consulting in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: Analysis of a mixed methods study using practice theory.

We studied video consulting in the National Health Service during 2020-2021 through video interviews, an online survey and online discussions with people who had provided and participated in such consultations. Video consulting had previously been used for selected groups in limited settings in the UK. The pandemic created a seismic shift in the context for remote consulting, in which video transformed from a niche technology typically introduced by individual clinicians committed to innovation and quality improvement to offering what many felt was the only safe way to deliver certain types of healthcare. A new practice emerged: a co-constitution of technology and healthcare made possible by new configurations of equipment, connectivity and physical spaces. Despite heterogeneous service settings and previous experiences of video consulting, we found certain kinds of common changes had made video consulting possible. We used practice theory to analyse these changes, interpreting the commonalities found in our data as changes in purpose, material arrangements and a relaxing of rules about security, confidentiality and location of consultations. The practice of video consulting was equivocal. Accounts of, and preferences for, video consulting varied as did the extent to which it was sustained after initial take-up. People made sense of video consulting in different ways, ranging from interpreting video as offering a new modality of healthcare for the future to a sub-optimal, temporary alternative to in-person care. Despite these variations, video consulting became a recognisable social phenomenon, albeit neither universally adopted nor consistently sustained. The nature of this social change offers new perspectives on processes of implementation and spread and scale-up. Our findings have important implications for the future of video consulting. We emphasise the necessity for viable material arrangements and a continued shared interpretation of the meaning of video consulting for the practice to continue.

Achieving Spread, Scale Up and Sustainability of Video Consulting Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic? Findings From a Comparative Case Study of Policy Implementation in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Requirements for physical distancing as a result of COVID-19 and the need to reduce the risk of infection prompted policy supporting rapid roll out of video consulting across the four nations of the UK-England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Drawing on three studies of the accelerated implementation and uptake of video consulting across the four nations, we present a comparative and interpretive policy analysis of the spread and scale-up of video consulting during the pandemic. Data include interviews with 59 national level stakeholders, 55 health and social care staff and 30 patients, 20 national documents, responses to a UK-wide survey of NHS staff and analysis of routine activity data. Sampling ensured variations in geography, clinical context and adoption progress across the combined dataset. Comparative analysis was guided by theory on policy implementation and crisis management. The pandemic provided a "burning platform" prompting UK-wide policy supporting the use of video consulting in health care as a critical means of managing the risk of infection and a standard mode of provision. This policy push facilitated interest in video consulting across the UK. There was, however, marked variation in how this was put into practice across the four nations. Pre-existing infrastructure, policies and incentives for video consulting in Scotland, combined with a collaborative system-level approach, a program dedicated to developing video-based services and resourcing and supporting staff to deliver them enabled widespread buy-in and rapid spread. In England, Wales and Northern Ireland, pre-existing support for digital health (e.g., hardware, incentives) and virtual care, combined with reduced regulation and "light touch" procurement managed to override some (but by no means all) cultural barriers and professional resistance to implementing digital change. In Northern Ireland and Wales, limited infrastructure muted spread. In all three countries, significant effort at system level to develop, review and run video consulting programs enabled a substantial number of providers to change their practice, albeit variably across settings. Across all four nations ongoing uncertainty, potential restructuring and tightening of regulations, along with difficulties inherent in addressing inequalities in digital access, raise questions about the longer-term sustainability of changes to-date.

Protocol for 'virtual presence': a qualitative study of the cultural dialectic between loneliness and technology.

INTRODUCTION: Most research on loneliness comes from the health sciences, statistically seeking to measure the health-related effects of feeling alone or isolated. There is a need to expand on this understanding and explore loneliness as a more complex social phenomenon. In this article, we present a qualitative design for studying the intersection between loneliness, technology and culture. Conceptualising this as the cultural dialectic between loneliness and technology, we aim to unpack the reciprocal ways by which understandings of loneliness shape technology, while technologies also affect society's understandings of loneliness. In elucidating this dialectic, we aim to develop new knowledge and a novel theoretical framework for understanding loneliness and its technological solutions, which, in turn, can enable better solutions to contemporary problems of loneliness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will adopt a qualitative approach that combines interviews, participant observation and textual analysis to explore loneliness and its technological solutions from the perspectives of policy-makers, producers, professionals and users in Norway and the UK. The data will be analysed through an analytical framework combining insights from discourse theory and philosophical debates on presence, which will allow us to capture and rethink fundamental assumptions about loneliness and technology. Outcomes will be revised understandings of loneliness, relevant to researchers, entrepreneurs, policy-makers, clinicians, educators and the broader public. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The project has been evaluated and approved by the data protection officer at Oslo Metropolitan University and by the Norwegian Social Science Data Services. Additional ethical approval for data collection in the UK has been provided by the University of Oxford Interdivisional Research Ethics Committee. Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, international conference presentations and lay media.

Variations in colorectal cancer surgery practice across the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic - 'Every land has its own law'.

BACKGROUND: In March 2020 NHS England issued guidelines recognizing the elective component of cancer surgeries may be 'curtailed', due to staffing and supply shortages during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it suggested, 'local solutions' should be sought in order to protect the delivery of cancer services. We aimed to compare surgeons' practice for the provision of colorectal (CR) cancer surgery across the United Kingdom (UK), against updated Joint Royal Colleges & ACPGBI guidelines and highlight differences in practice, if any. METHOD: An online survey was conducted. It examined surgical practice across the UK against current protocols for CR cancer surgeries, during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: 29 individual responses were received from 23 NHS Trusts across the UK. 23/29 (79%) surgeons ceased or experienced delays in their CR cancer surgeries during the pandemic, with 3/29 (10%) yet to reintroduce these services. 19/26 (73%) surgeons instructed their patients to self-isolate prior to surgery, of which 5/19 (26%) correctly enforced a duration of 14 days. 10/19 (53%) participants adhered to guidelines of performing a CT chest within 24 h of surgery. 10/26 (38%) participants believe their patients are experiencing longer hospital admissions in the COVID-19 setting. CONCLUSION: This snap shot survey highlights the dramatic variations in CR cancer surgery practice within the UK and inconsistent adherence to protocols. Guidelines will no doubt change as our knowledge of COVID-19 increases both nationally and internationally. It is essential CR surgeons keep up to date with changes in guidance, so uniformity in practice can be maintained.