Telehealth for pediatric well visits: sometimes the best option

During the early part of the COVID-19 pandemic, pediatricians realized that to reach families and continue to provide preventive care, including developmental, mental health, and social determinants of health screenings, they needed to embrace telehealth and meet families where they were: at home. [...]many families expressed that they were more comfortable staying on "their turf" rather than coming to a health care facility, which changes the power paradigm of who drives the visit. During the pandemic, current fee-for-service models have rapidly exposed the problems with our health care system.

Adapting in-person diabetes group visits to a virtual setting across federally qualified health centers.

Diabetes group visits (GVs) have been shown to improve glycemic control, enrich patient self-care, and decrease healthcare utilization among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). While telehealth has become routine, virtual GVs remain understudied, especially in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). We conducted a 5-year cluster randomized trial with a waitlist control group to test the impact of diabetes GVs on patients' outcomes in Midwestern FQHCs. Due to COVID-19, the 6 waitlisted FQHCs adapted to virtual GVs. FQHC staff were provided training and support to implement virtual GVs. The GV intervention included 6 monthly 1-1.5-h long education sessions and appointments with a primary care provider. We measured staff perspectives and satisfaction via GV session logs, monthly webinars, and staff surveys and interviews. Adaptations for implementation of virtual GV included: additional staff training, video conferencing platform use, decreased session length and group size, and adjusting study materials, activities, and provider appointments. Sites enrolled a total of 48 adults with T2DM for virtual GVs. Most FQHCs were urban and all FQHCs predominantly had patients on public insurance. Patients attended 2.1 ± 2.2 GVs across sites on average. Thirty-four patients (71%) attended one or more virtual GVs. The average GV lasted 79.4 min. Barriers to virtual GVs included patient technology issues and access, patient recruitment and enrollment, and limited staff availability. Virtual GV facilitators included providing tablets, internet access from the clinic, and technical support. Staff reported spending on average 4.9 h/week planning and implementing GVs (SD = 5.9). On average, 6 staff from each FQHC participated in GV training and 1.2 staff reported past GV experience. All staff had worked at least 1 year at their FQHC and most reported multiple years of experience caring for patients with T2DM. Staff-perceived virtual GV benefits included: empowered patients to manage their diabetes, provided patients with social support and frequent contact with providers, improved relationships with patients, increased team collaboration, and better patient engagement and care-coordination. Future studies and health centers can incorporate these findings to implement virtual diabetes GVs and promote accessible diabetes care.

Re-imaging healthcare delivery in the era of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the deficiencies of the current healthcare system in terms of a disconnect between primary and tertiary care and increasing subspecialisation, the focus on acute episodic care rather than on prevention in a time where chronic disease prevails and an inefficient use of healthcare resources. Herein, we present the case for an alternative model of healthcare delivery - shared medical appointments - which are efficient, effective and empowering and can be transitioned to the virtual environment successfully. We highlight the barriers to implementation and how these can be overcome.

Qualitative exploration of the psychological dimensions of telehealth shared medical appointments (SMAs) for buprenorphine prescribing.

Background: Shared medical appointments (SMAs) for buprenorphine prescribing are clinical encounters in which multiple patients with opioid problems receive treatment from providers in a group setting. Telehealth, the provision of clinical services remotely using telecommunications technology, is an essential modality for improving access to healthcare when combined with SMAs, especially since the COVID pandemic. Objectives: The current study specifically examined psychological components of telehealth SMAs for buprenorphine prescribing to learn about the benefits and drawbacks of this treatment model. Methods: Data was collected through qualitative interviews with patients (N=10) in a psychiatry addiction medicine clinic. Narrative synthesis using grounded theory was conducted to identify salient themes from the interviews. Results: Findings highlighted the advantages and downsides of telehealth SMA to treat addictive disorders in a digital age: (1) Shared group identity; (2) Decreased stigma around buprenorphine; (3) Benefits of telehealth; (4) Discomfort with group SMA format; (5) Strategies for managing medication side effects; and (6) Enhanced empathy for providers. Several themes corresponded to therapeutic factors identified in group therapy (i.e., installation of hope, universality, imparting information, altruism) and mechanisms theorized in previous SMA research (e.g., combating isolation, disease self-management, feeling inspired by others). Conclusion: Telehealth SMAs for buprenorphine prescribing may be a unique opportunity for patients to receive both ongoing medication management and psychosocial benefits that promote recovery and reduce stigma. The SMA group had shortcomings for some patients, including privacy concerns, fear of judgment from other patients and limited time to discuss individual concerns with providers.

Ensuring good continence care for patients: tips for nurses working in the community: There are many options to try before offering pads to patients with continence issues. Find out how to ask the right questions, assess symptoms and provide support

Continence care is a fundamental part of nursing, yet it has long been seen as a Cinderella service. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Primary Health Care is the property of RNCi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)

Implementing video group consultations in general practice during COVID-19: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Group consultations have been gaining ground as a novel approach to service delivery. When in-person care was restricted owing to COVID-19, general practice staff began delivering group consultations remotely over video. AIM: To examine how multiple interacting influences underpinned implementation and delivery of video group consultations (VGCs). DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study in general practice in England. METHOD: a) 32 semi-structured interviews with patients, clinical, and non-clinical staff (from eight GP surgeries in total), NHS policymakers and programme managers, and other stakeholders; b) observation in relevant training and operational meetings; and c) three co-design workshops (21 participants). Thematic analysis was informed by the Planning and Evaluating Remote Consulting Services (PERCS) framework. RESULTS: In the first year of the pandemic, VGCs focused on supporting those with long-term conditions or other shared health and social needs. Most patients welcomed clinical and peer input, and the opportunity to access their practice remotely during lockdown. However, not everyone agreed to engage in group-based care or was able to access IT equipment. At practice level, significant work was needed to deliver VGCs, such as setting up the digital infrastructure, gaining team buy-in, developing new patient-facing online facilitation roles, managing background operational processes, protecting online confidentiality, and ensuring professional indemnity cover. Training provided nationally was seen as instrumental in capacity building for VGC implementation. CONCLUSION: Small scale VGC implementation addressed unmet need during the pandemic. However, embedding VGCs in routine care requires rethinking of operational, infrastructural, and clinical processes. Additional research on costs and benefits at service and patient level is needed.

Program for Reducing Obesity (PRO): An institutional review of an insurance‐based weight loss program utilizing shared medical appointments

BackgroundBased on CDC estimates in the United States, the prevalence of obesity was 42.4% in 2017–2018, and the annual cost of obesity was $147 billion in 2008. Yet studies estimate that only 20–40% of adults with obesity received counseling from their primary care providers. Recent studies using shared medical appointments (SMA), where patients are seen by a multidisciplinary team, have shown promising results in obesity management. We developed an insurance‐based weight loss program incorporating SMA, called the Program for Reducing Obesity (PRO), and report our findings here.MethodsEnrollment began in January 2019 at the UCLA Health Thousand Oaks clinic. Patients age ≥18 years with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 were eligible by referral to PRO, a program consisting of individual visits and SMAs with an obesity medicine board certified endocrinologist and registered dietitian. Primary outcomes were change in weight after 3, 6, and 12 months. Secondary outcomes included proportion that achieved ≥5% weight loss, change in percent body fat, HbA1c, HDL, triglycerides, and blood pressure.Results102 patients (mean age 59.7 years, 72% women, mean weight 103.6 kg, mean BMI 36.6 kg/m2) have been analyzed, with 91 patients completing at least 12 months of the program. Patients achieved significant weight loss: 3.0%, 5.0%, and 7.8% of their baseline weight after 3, 6, and 12 months respectively. 52% of patients lost ≥5% of their baseline weight after 12 months. Patients had significant reductions in body fat: 2.1%, 7.4%, and 6.7% of their baseline (all p ≤ 0.01) after 3, 6, and 12 months respectively. Improvements were also seen in HbA1c (p ≤ 0.01), triglycerides (p ≤ 0.04), and systolic blood pressure (p ≤ 0.07) after 12 months although not all results achieved statistical significance.ConclusionOur institutional review of PRO, an insurance‐based obesity program utilizing SMA, demonstrates a successful approach to promoting weight loss in a community‐based setting.

Long-Term Effectiveness of the TIME Intervention to Improve Diabetes Outcomes in Low-Income Settings: a 2-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: We previously found that a 6-month multidimensional diabetes program, TIME (Telehealth-Supported, Integrated Community Health Workers, Medication-Access) resulted in improved clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To follow TIME participant clinical outcomes for 24 months PARTICIPANTS: Low-income Latino(a)s with type 2 diabetes DESIGN AND INTERVENTION: We collected post-intervention clinical data for five cohorts (n = 101, mean n = 20/cohort) who participated in TIME programs from 2018 to 2020 in Houston, Texas. MAIN MEASURES: We gathered HbA1c (primary outcome), weight, body mass index (BMI), and blood pressure data at baseline, 6 months (intervention end), and semiannually thereafter until 24 months after baseline to assess sustainability. We also evaluated participant loss to follow-up until 24 months. KEY RESULTS: Participants decreased HbA1c levels during the intervention (p < 0.0001) and maintained these improvements at each timepoint from baseline to 24 months (p range: < 0.0001 to 0.015). Participants reduced blood pressure levels during TIME and maintained these changes at each timepoint from baseline until 18 months (systolic p range < 0.0001 to 0.0005, diastolic p range: < 0.0001 to 0.008) but not at 24 months (systolic: p = 0.065; diastolic: p = 0.85). There were no significant weight changes during TIME or post-intervention: weight (p range = 0.07 to 0.77), BMI (p range = 0.11 to 0.71). Attrition rates (loss to follow-up during the post-intervention period) were 5.9% (6 months), 24.8% (12 months), 35.6% (18 months), and 41.8% (24 months). CONCLUSIONS: It is possible for vulnerable populations to maintain long-term glycemic and blood pressure improvements using a multiple dimensional intervention. Attrition rates rose over time but show promise given the majority of post-intervention timepoints occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic when low-income populations were most susceptible to suboptimal healthcare access. Future studies are needed to evaluate longitudinal outcomes of diabetes interventions conducted by local clinics rather than research teams.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Routine Medical Care and Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 restrictions and fear dramatically changed the use of medical care. Understanding the magnitude of cancelled and postponed appointments and associated factors can help identify approaches to mitigate unmet need. OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of medical visits cancelled or postponed and for whom. We hypothesized that adults with serious medical conditions and those with higher anxiety, depressive symptoms, and avoidance-oriented coping would have more cancellations/postponements. DESIGN: Four nationally representative cross-sectional surveys conducted online in May, July, October, and December 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 59,747 US adults who completed 15-min online surveys. 69% cooperation rate. MEASURES: Physical and mental health visits and cancer screening cancelled or postponed over prior 2 months. Plan to cancel or postpone visits over the next 2 months. Relationship with demographics, medical conditions, local COVID-19 death rate, anxiety, depressive symptoms, coping, intolerance of uncertainty, and perceived COVID-19 risk. KEY RESULTS: Of the 58% (N = 34,868) with a medical appointment during the 2 months before the survey, 64% had an appointment cancelled or postponed in May, decreasing to 37% in December. Of the 41% of respondents with scheduled cancer screening, 20% cancelled/postponed, which was stable May to December. People with more medical conditions were more likely to cancel or postpone medical visits (OR 1.19 per condition, 95% CI 1.16, 1.22) and cancer screening (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.15, 1.24). Race, ethnicity, and income had weak associations with cancelled/postponed visits, local death rate was unrelated, but anxiety and depressive symptoms were strongly related to cancellations, and this grew between May and December. CONCLUSIONS: Cancelled medical care and cancer screening were more common among persons with medical conditions, anxiety and depression, even after accounting for COVID-19 deaths. Outreach and support to ensure that patients are not avoiding needed care due to anxiety, depression and inaccurate perceptions of risk will be important.

Protocol refinement for a diabetes pragmatic trial using the PRECIS-2 framework.

BACKGROUND: This report describes how we refined a protocol for a pragmatic comparative effectiveness study of two models of an evidence-based diabetes shared medical appointment intervention and used the PRECIS-2 rating system to evaluate these adaptations. METHODS: We report primary data collected between June and August 2019, and protocol refinements completed between 2018 and 2020. Twenty-two members of the study team collaborated in protocol refinement and completed the PRECIS-2 ratings of study pragmatism. We discuss study design refinements made to achieve the desired level of pragmatism vs. experimental control for each of the nine PRECIS-2 dimensions. Study team members received training on PRECIS-2 scoring and were asked to rate the study protocol on the nine PRECIS-2 dimensions. Ratings were compared using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In general, the PRECIS-2 ratings revealed high levels of pragmatism, but somewhat less pragmatic ratings on the categories of Delivery and Organization (costs and resources). This variation was purposeful, and we provide the rationale for and steps taken to obtain the targeted level of pragmatism on each PRECIS-2 dimension, as well as detail design changes made to a) make the design more pragmatic and b) address COVID-19 issues. There was general agreement among team members and across different types of stakeholders on PRECIS-2 ratings. CONCLUSIONS: We discuss lessons learned from use of PRECIS-2 and experiences in refining the study to be maximally pragmatic on some dimensions and less so on other dimensions. This paper expands on prior research by describing actions to achieve higher levels of pragmatism and revise our protocol fit to the changed context. We make recommendations for future use of PRECIS-2 to help address changing context and other strategies for the planning of and transparent reporting on pragmatic research and comparative effectiveness research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Registration ID: NCT03590041 .

The Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Outbreak on the Psychological Flexibility and Behaviour of Cancelling Medical Appointments of Italian Patients with Pre-Existing Medical Condition: The "ImpACT-COVID-19 for Patients" Multi-Centre Observational Study.

Psychological distress imposed by the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak particularly affects patients with pre-existing medical conditions, and the progression of their diseases. Patients who fail to keep scheduled medical appointments experience a negative impact on care. The aim of this study is to investigate the psychosocial factors contributing to the cancellation of medical appointments during the pandemic by patients with pre-existing health conditions. Data were collected in eleven Italian hospitals during the last week of lockdown, and one month later. In order to assess the emotional impact of the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak and the subject's degree of psychological flexibility, we developed an ad hoc questionnaire (ImpACT), referring to the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) model. The Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS) and the Cognitive Fusion Questionnaire (CFQ) were also used. Pervasive dysfunctional use of experiential avoidance behaviours (used with the function to avoid thought, emotions, sensations), feelings of loneliness and high post-traumatic stress scores were found to correlate with the fear of COVID-19, increasing the likelihood of cancelling medical appointments. Responding promptly to the information and psychological needs of patients who cancel medical appointments can have positive effects in terms of psychological and physical health.

Utilizing Telemedicine for Group Visit Provider Encounters: A Feasibility and Acceptability Study.

BACKGROUND: The value of telemedicine has been underscored during the coronavirus pandemic. Utilizing telemedicine could markedly enhance group visit scalability and sustainability. However, there are limited data demonstrating telemedicine use for group visits. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of provider encounters conducted via telemedicine in group visits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a 6-month diabetes group visit program and compared in-person (months 1-3) versus telemedicine (videoconferencing) (months 4-6) patient-provider encounters. Participants completed the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) at 6-months (primary outcome). To ensure telemedicine did not negatively affect clinical outcomes, we compared in-person versus telemedicine differences in HbA1c, blood pressure, body mass index (BMI), and attendance. RESULTS: The TUQ revealed that participants (N=19) found telemedicine useful and easy to use (4.9/5.0, 4.4/5.0, respectively) and with excellent interface (4.3/5.0), interaction (4.6/5.0), reliability (4.2/5.0), and satisfaction (4.4/5.0). There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between arms: HbA1c (in-person: -0.60%, telemedicine: -0.52%, p=0.86), blood pressure (systolic: p=0.475, diastolic: p=0.683), weight (p=0.982), BMI (p=0.981), attendance (in-person: 75.44%, telemedicine: 70.12%, p=0.551). CONCLUSION: Provider telemedicine encounters in group visits are feasible and acceptable. This is a promising model to address provider limitations in group visits and increase access to care. Larger studies are needed to further evaluate these findings.