Patient and caregiver experience with telepharmacy in cancer care to support beginning systemic therapy: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Although the COVID-19 pandemic spurred telehealth adoption for many specialties and care team roles, the patient and caregiver experience for telepharmacy visits has been relatively understudied. To our knowledge, there is a paucity of studies that have attempted to qualitatively evaluate this. This study aimed to qualitatively assess the patient and caregiver experience of telepharmacy visits in a cancer center. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 21 patients with cancer and seven caregivers that had attended a telepharmacy visit between December 1, 2021, and May 24, 2022. The interviews assessed visit content, overall satisfaction, system experience, visit quality, and future preferences for pharmacy visits as telehealth versus in-person. We used both deductive and inductive coding to identify themes. RESULTS: Telepharmacy delivery was generally well-received. Reasons for having the telepharmacy visit included reviewing chemotherapy procedures, side effects to expect during treatment, providing education on recently prescribed medications, offering dietary recommendations (e.g., avoiding grapefruit juice), and performing medication reconciliation. Participants were receptive to having pharmacy visits through telehealth due to the perceived lack of a need to have a physical exam and prior relationship with the pharmacist. Participants also highlighted the main reason for the telepharmacy visits was primarily to provide patient education, which participants felt was suitable for telehealth. CONCLUSIONS: The patient and caregiver experience of telepharmacy is influenced by several factors, such as ease of connectivity, communicating effectively with the pharmacist, and timing of the telepharmacy visit (e.g., immediately after picking up medications from the pharmacy). Participants' recommendations to improve telepharmacy delivery included health systems raising awareness of telepharmacy services and providing a list of questions to patients to guide discussions.

Rapid adaptation of cancer screening practices during COVID-19: A multi-state qualitative study.

Context: The COVID-19 pandemic required primary care practices to rapidly adapt cancer screening procedures to comply with changing guidelines and policies. Objective: This study sought to: 1) identify cancer screening barriers and facilitators during the COVID-19 pandemic; 2) describe cancer screening adaptations; and 3) provide recommendations. Study design: A qualitative study was conducted (n= 42) with primary care staff. Individual interviews were conducted through videoconference from August 2020 - April 2021 and recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for themes using NVivo 12 Plus. Setting: Primary care practices included federally qualified health centers, tribal health centers, rural health clinics, hospital/health system-owned, and academic medical centers located across ten states including urban (55%) and rural (45%) sites. Population studied: Primary care staff included physicians (n=13), residents (n=10), advanced practice providers (n=9), and administrators (n=10). Outcome measures: The interviews assessed perceptions about cancer screening barriers and facilitators, necessary adaptations, and future recommendations. Results: Barriers to cancer screening included delays in primary and specialty care, staff shortages, lack of personal protective equipment, patient hesitancy to receive in-person care, postal service delays for mail-home testing, COVID-19 travel restrictions (for Mexico-US border-crossing patients) and organizational policies (e.g., required COVID-19 testing prior to screening). Facilitators included better care coordination and collaboration due to the pandemic and more time during telehealth visits to discuss cancer screening compared to in-person visits. Adaptations included delayed screening, patient triage (e.g., prioritizing patients overdue for screening), telehealth visits to discuss cancer screening, mail-home testing, coordinating cancer screenings (e.g., providing fecal immunochemical test materials during cervical cancer screening) and same-day cancer screening. Recommendations included more public health education about the importance of cancer screening during COVID-19, more mail-home testing, and expanded healthcare access (e.g., weekend clinic) to address patient backlogs for cancer screening. Conclusions: Primary care staff developed innovative strategies to adapt cancer screening during the COVID-19 pandemic. Unresolved challenges (e.g., patient backlogs) will require additional implementation stra.

Evaluation of Employment Loss and Financial Hardship Among US Adults With Disabilities During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

This cross-sectional study estimates the prevalence and determinants of employment loss and financial hardship among adults with disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Virtual Care for the Longitudinal Management of Chronic Conditions: A Systematic Review

As both the largest integrated health system and largest provider of telehealth in the country, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) has a particular interest in understanding how best to implement and utilize virtual care. VHA has long embraced virtual care as part of its mission to "serve all who have served” regardless of their socioeconomic and geographic circumstances. Having begun conducting "virtual care” in the 1960s when doctors first communicated with patient's via TV screens,1 VHA has since provided over 2.6 million episodes of care to more than 900,000 Veterans in 20192 and has distributed over 50,000 data- and video-enabled iPads for Veterans throughout the country.3 Virtual care within VHA includes services such as MyHealtheVet secure messaging, the Home Telehealth program that combines case management principles with remote monitoring to improve access and coordinate care, and the VA Video Connect (VVC) video platform for synchronous visits within both specialty and primary care.4 Increasing Veteran access to care via virtual care has been an integral part of VHA's strategy for improving chronic disease management for a population that is on average older and sicker than their civilian counterparts.5,6 Given the importance that virtual care has for Veteran care even beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, understanding the strengths and limitations associated with synchronous virtual care will be critical in shaping how VHA utilizes virtual care going forward.

Telehealth for the Longitudinal Management of Chronic Conditions: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Extensive literature support telehealth as a supplement or adjunct to in-person care for the management of chronic conditions such as congestive heart failure (CHF) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Evidence is needed to support the use of telehealth as an equivalent and equitable replacement for in-person care and to assess potential adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review to address the following question: among adults, what is the effect of synchronous telehealth (real-time response among individuals via phone or phone and video) compared with in-person care (or compared with phone, if synchronous video care) for chronic management of CHF, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and T2DM on key disease-specific clinical outcomes and health care use? METHODS: We followed systematic review methodologies and searched two databases (MEDLINE and Embase). We included randomized or quasi-experimental studies that evaluated the effect of synchronously delivered telehealth for relevant chronic conditions that occurred over ≥2 encounters and in which some or all in-person care was supplanted by care delivered via phone or video. We assessed the bias using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care risk of bias (ROB) tool and the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. We described the findings narratively and did not conduct meta-analysis owing to the small number of studies and the conceptual heterogeneity of the identified interventions. RESULTS: We identified 8662 studies, and 129 (1.49%) were reviewed at the full-text stage. In total, 3.9% (5/129) of the articles were retained for data extraction, all of which (5/5, 100%) were randomized controlled trials. The CHF study (1/5, 20%) was found to have high ROB and randomized patients (n=210) to receive quarterly automated asynchronous web-based review and follow-up of telemetry data versus synchronous personal follow-up (in-person vs phone-based) for 1 year. A 3-way comparison across study arms found no significant differences in clinical outcomes. Overall, 80% (4/5) of the studies (n=466) evaluated synchronous care for patients with T2DM (ROB was judged to be low for 2, 50% of studies and high for 2, 50% of studies). In total, 20% (1/5) of the studies were adequately powered to assess the difference in glycosylated hemoglobin level between groups; however, no significant difference was found. Intervention design varied greatly from remote monitoring of blood glucose combined with video versus in-person visits to an endocrinology clinic to a brief, 3-week remote intervention to stabilize uncontrolled diabetes. No articles were identified for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: This review found few studies with a variety of designs and interventions that used telehealth as a replacement for in-person care. Future research should consider including observational studies and studies on additional highly prevalent chronic diseases.

Telestroke Infrastructure, Processes, and Support Needs: A Survey of Hospitals in Five States.

Introduction: Telestroke has been shown to be a cost-effective approach to promoting use and timeliness of evidence-based treatment. However, adoption of telestroke has been relatively low. Several barriers to telestroke implementation have been previously identified in the literature. These barriers, and the strategies needed to overcome them, may vary across hospitals. Our study aimed to examine telestroke programs to identify opportunities for future research and efforts to promote effective implementation and sustainment of telestroke services. Methods: We surveyed hospitals in five states to capture information about the current status of the hospital's telestroke program; the model(s) of delivery being used (e.g., hub-and-spoke and third-party vendor); and telestroke infrastructure, processes, and implementation strategies. The survey included both closed-ended and open-ended response options. Descriptive results are presented, complemented with illustrative examples of open-ended responses. Results: We received 89 responses, each representing a different hospital. Approximately one-third of telestroke programs in our sample began between 2018 and 2020. More than two-thirds reported participating in a collaboration with other organizations to improve telestroke services. The most commonly reported, high-priority topics for additional guidance involved monitoring process measures, using performance indicators for improvement, and sharing data from measures with physicians. Discussion: Results complement prior studies, specifically about impacts of COVID-19 on telestroke programs and capabilities that hospitals most need assistance with. Challenges faced and guidance needed differ across hospitals, suggesting a need for a tailored support. The results also suggest more work is needed to understand factors that threaten sustainability of telestroke programs.