Stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Remote mental health consultations were swiftly implemented across mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has begun to inform future design and delivery of telemental health services. Exploring the in-depth experiences of those involved is important to understand the complex, multi-level factors that influence the implementation of remote mental health consultations. The aim of this study was to explore stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted whereby semi-structured, individual interviews were undertaken with mental health providers, service users, and managers (n = 19) to acquire rich information. Interviews were conducted between November 2021 and July 2022. The interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were analysed thematically using a deductive and inductive approach. RESULTS: Six themes were identified. The advantages of remote mental health consultations were described, including convenience and increased accessibility to care. Providers and managers described varying levels of success with implementation, citing complexity and incompatibility with existing workflows as barriers to adoption. Providers' access to resources, guidance, and training were notable facilitators. Participants perceived remote mental health consultations to be satisfactory but not equivalent to in-person care in terms of quality. Views about the inferior quality of remote consultations stemmed from beliefs about the inhibited therapeutic relationship and a possible reduction in effectiveness compared to in-person care. Whilst a return to in-person services was mostly preferred, participants acknowledged a potential adjunct role for remote consultations in certain circumstances. CONCLUSIONS: Remote mental health consultations were welcomed as a means to continue care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their swift and necessary adoption placed pressure on providers and organisations to adapt quickly, navigating challenges and adjusting to a new way of working. This implementation created changes to workflows and dynamics that disrupted the traditional method of mental health care delivery. Further consideration of the importance of the therapeutic relationship and fostering positive provider beliefs and feelings of competence are needed to ensure satisfactory and effective implementation of remote mental health consultations going forward.

Consultation Rate and Mode by Deprivation in English General Practice From 2018 to 2022: Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on primary care service delivery with an increased use of remote consultations. With general practice delivering record numbers of appointments and rising concerns around access, funding, and staffing in the UK National Health Service, we assessed contemporary trends in consultation rate and modes (ie, face-to-face versus remote). OBJECTIVE: This paper describes trends in consultation rates in general practice in England for key demographics before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We explore the use of remote and face-to-face consultations with regard to socioeconomic deprivation to understand the possible effect of changes in consultation modes on health inequalities. METHODS: We did a retrospective analysis of 9,429,919 consultations by general practitioners, nurses, or other health care professionals between March 2018 and February 2022 for patients registered at 397 general practices in England. We used routine electronic health records from Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum with linkage to national data sets. Negative binomial models were used to predict consultation rates and modes (ie, remote versus face-to-face) by age, sex, and socioeconomic deprivation over time. RESULTS: Overall consultation rates increased by 15% from 4.92 in 2018-2019 to 5.66 in 2021-2022 with some fluctuation during the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. The breakdown into face-to-face and remote consultations shows that the pandemic precipitated a rapid increase in remote consultations across all groups, but the extent varies by age. Consultation rates increased with increasing levels of deprivation. Socioeconomic differences in consultation rates, adjusted for sex and age, halved during the pandemic (from 0.36 to 0.18, indicating more consultations in the most deprived), effectively narrowing relative differences between deprivation quintiles. This trend remains when stratified by sex, but the difference across deprivation quintiles is smaller for men. The most deprived saw a relatively larger increase in remote and decrease in face-to-face consultation rates compared to the least deprived. CONCLUSIONS: The substantial increases in consultation rates observed in this study imply an increased pressure on general practice. The narrowing of consultation rates between deprivation quintiles is cause for concern, given ample evidence that health needs are greater in more deprived areas.

A service evaluation to examine the effectiveness of chronic pain management programmes delivered using video conferencing technology compared to in-person.

Introduction: The Covid-19 pandemic required rapid substitution of in-person Pain Management Programmes (PMP) delivery with delivery via videoconferencing technologies (VCT). No prior published VCT-PMP effectiveness findings were found, so an evaluation was conducted to explore effectiveness of this method and to compare psychometric outcomes with pre-pandemic, in-person- PMPs, delivered in routine clinical settings. Methods: Participants were routinely attending PMPs. A consecutive series of six in-person-PMPs (n = 61) immediately prior to the pandemic were compared with the first series of six VCT-PMPs (n = 64) delivered in the same services. A within-subjects comparison of clinical outcomes (pre-post for VCT-PMP and in-person PMP) and a between-subjects comparison of delivery type was conducted (two-way mixed ANOVA). Reliable change indices examined reliable improvements and deteriorations by delivery type. Results: Both PMP delivery format groups made significant improvements in anxiety, depression, pain self-efficacy, chronic pain acceptance and pain catastrophising. No significant difference was found between VCT-PMP and in-person-PMP on each of the measures. Reliable change indices indicated similar levels of improvement and deterioration with each delivery format with improvements far outweighing deteriorations. Attrition was greater in the VCT format (33%) versus in-person-PMP (18%). Conclusion: This study indicates that meaningful change as measured by standard psychometric questionnaires can occur in PMPs delivered via VCT and appear broadly equivalent to that achieved through in-person delivery. Physical performance outcomes such as quality and amount of movement were not measured or explored.

Remote care in UK general practice: baseline data on 11 case studies [version 2; peer review: 2 approved].

Background: Accessing and receiving care remotely (by telephone, video or online) became the default option during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but in-person care has unique benefits in some circumstances. We are studying UK general practices as they try to balance remote and in-person care, with recurrent waves of COVID-19 and various post-pandemic backlogs. Methods: Mixed-methods (mostly qualitative) case study across 11 general practices. Researchers-in-residence have built relationships with practices and become familiar with their contexts and activities; they are following their progress for two years via staff and patient interviews, documents and ethnography, and supporting improvement efforts through co-design. In this paper, we report baseline data. Results: Reflecting our maximum-variety sampling strategy, the 11 practices vary in size, setting, ethos, staffing, population demographics and digital maturity, but share common contextual features-notably system-level stressors such as high workload and staff shortages, and UK's technical and regulatory infrastructure. We have identified both commonalities and differences between practices in terms of how they: 1] manage the 'digital front door' (access and triage) and balance demand and capacity; 2] strive for high standards of quality and safety; 3] ensure digital inclusion and mitigate wider inequalities; 4] support and train their staff (clinical and non-clinical), students and trainees; 5] select, install, pilot and use technologies and the digital infrastructure which support them; and 6] involve patients in their improvement efforts. Conclusions: General practices' responses to pandemic-induced disruptive innovation appear unique and situated. We anticipate that by focusing on depth and detail, this longitudinal study will throw light on why a solution that works well in one practice does not work at all in another. As the study unfolds, we will explore how practices achieve timely diagnosis of urgent or serious illness and manage continuity of care, long-term conditions and complex needs.

General Practitioners' Experiences With Potentials and Pitfalls of Video Consultations in Norway During the COVID-19 Lockdown: Qualitative Analysis of Free-Text Survey Answers.

BACKGROUND: The use of video consultations (VCs) in Norwegian general practice rapidly increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. During societal lockdowns, VCs were used for nearly all types of clinical problems, as in-person consultations were kept to a minimum. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore general practitioners' (GPs') experiences of potentials and pitfalls associated with the use of VCs during the first pandemic lockdown. METHODS: Between April 14 and May 3, 2020, all regular Norwegian GPs (N=4858) were invited to answer a web-based survey, which included open-ended questions about their experiences with the advantages and pitfalls of VCs. A total of 2558 free-text answers were provided by 657 of the 1237 GPs who participated in the survey. The material was subjected to reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Four main themes were identified. First, VCs are described as being particularly convenient, informative, and effective for consultations with previously known patients. Second, strategically planned VCs may facilitate effective tailoring of clinical trajectories that optimize clinical workflow. VCs allow for an initial overview of the problem (triage), follow-up evaluation after an in-person consultation, provision of advice and information concerning test results and discharge notes, extension of sick leaves, and delivery of other medical certificates. VCs may, in certain situations, enhance the GPs' insight in their patients' relational and socioeconomical resources and vulnerabilities, and even facilitate relationship-building with patients in need of care who might otherwise be reluctant to seek help. Third, VCs are characterized by a demarcated communication style and the "one problem approach," which may entail effectiveness in the short run. However, the web-based communication climate implies degradation of valuable nonverbal signals that are more evidently present in in-person consultations. Finally, overreliance on VCs may, in a longer perspective, undermine the establishment and maintenance of relational trust, with a negative impact on the quality of care and patient safety. Compensatory mechanisms include clarifying with the patient what the next step is, answering any questions and giving further advice on treatment if conditions do not improve or there is a need for follow-up. Participation of family members can also be helpful to improve reciprocal understanding and safety. CONCLUSIONS: The findings have relevance for future implementation of VCs and deserve further exploration under less stressful circumstances.

Post-COVID-19: can digital solutions lead to a more equitable global healthcare workforce?

An unintended consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic has been the exponential growth of telemedicine, with automation of healthcare becoming more common. Face-to-face meetings and training events have been replaced relatively seamlessly with online versions, taking clinical or academic expertise to distant parts of the world and making them more accessible and affordable. The wide reach of digital platforms offering remote healthcare offers the opportunity of democratising access to high-quality healthcare, However, certain challenges remain: (a) clinical guidance developed in one geographical area may need adaptation for use in others; (b) regulatory mechanisms from one jurisdiction need to offer patient safety across other jurisdictions; (c) barriers created by disparity in technology infrastructure and the variation in pay for services across different economies, leading to brain drain and an inequitable workforce. The World Health Organization's Global Code of Practice on the International Recruitment of Health Personnel could offer the preliminary framework on which solutions to these challenges could be built.

The Effectiveness of Remote Consultations During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Tool for Modernising the National Health Service (NHS).

Objective The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic prompted major changes to the delivery of care. There was a move towards remote consultations in order to mitigate the risk of viral exposure and the risk of delaying care. Remote consultations will play a prominent role within the National Health Service (NHS) in the future. This project aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of remote consultations relative to face-to-face (F2F) consultations. Methods A local retrospective audit of remote consultations in ENT was performed by comparing outcome data for video and telephone appointments during the first peak of the pandemic to outcomes for F2F consultations during the same months of the preceding year. Chi-square tests were employed to determine whether there was any statistically significant discrepancy between the two modalities. Results Outcomes from a total of 314 patient consultations were reviewed. One hundred and fifty-four patients were male, and 160 were female; 111 patient consultations were conducted F2F, and 203 remotely (101 via telephone and 102 via video). There was no statistically significant difference detected between remote and F2F groups for rates of investigation, listing for theatre, referral to other specialties, and initiating treatment. Patients reviewed remotely were less likely to be discharged than those reviewed F2F (p=<0.001). Comparing the two remote modalities, telephone patients were more likely to undergo investigation than patients reviewed over video (p = 0.031). Conclusions Remote consultations were an effective and reliable resource for maintaining a high standard of care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings suggest that remote consultations will prove a valuable tool for clinicians in the remobilisation of health services in the post-pandemic era.

Remote consultations in primary care across low-, middle- and high-income countries: Implications for policy and care delivery.

The COVID-19 pandemic mandated a substantial switch in primary health care delivery from an in-person to a mainly remote telephone or video service. As the COVID-19 pandemic approaches its third year, limited progress appears to have been made in terms of policy development around consultation methods for the post-acute phase of the pandemic. In September 2020, the International Primary Care Respiratory Group convened a global panel of primary care clinicians - including family physicians, paediatricians, pharmacists, academics and patients - to consider the policy and health management implications of the move to remote consultations in the primary care setting. The group gave special consideration to how and how far remote consultations should be integrated into routine primary health care delivery. Remote consultations can be a useful alternative to in-person consultations in primary care not only in situations where there is a need for viral infection control but also for the routine delivery of chronic disease management. However, they may not be more time efficient for the clinician, and they can add to the workload and work-related stress for primary care practitioners if they remain the dominant consultation mode. Remote consultations are also less appropriate than in-person consultations for new disease diagnosis, dealing with multiple issues and providing complex care. Ensuring health care professionals have the appropriate skill set to effectively deliver remote consultations, administrative and/or IT support and appropriate reimbursement will be key to achieving optimal integration of remote consultations into routine clinical practice. Addressing digital access and digital literacy issues at a societal level will also be essential to ensure individuals have fair and equitable access to the internet and sufficient security for exchange of personal and health-related data.

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.

Patients' and clinicians' perspectives on the primary care consultations for acute respiratory infections during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: an eight-country qualitative study in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients' and clinicians' perceptions of healthcare-seeking behaviour and delivery of care is unclear. The pandemic accelerated the use of remote care, and understanding its benefits and drawbacks may inform its implementation during current and future healthcare emergencies. AIM: To explore patients' and primary care professionals' (PCPs) experiences of primary care delivery in the first wave of the pandemic. DESIGN & SETTING: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in primary care in eight European countries (England, Ireland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, Poland, Sweden, and Germany). METHOD: A total of 146 interviews were conducted with 80 PCPs and 66 patients consulting for respiratory tract infection (RTI) symptoms, in eight European countries. Data were collected between April and July 2020, and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: It was found that patients accepted telemedicine when PCPs spent time to understand and address their concerns, but a minority preferred in-person consultations. PCPs felt that remote consultations created emotional distance between themselves and patients, and they reported having to manage diverse COVID-19-related medical and social concerns. CONCLUSION: Remote consultations for RTI symptoms may be acceptable long term if both groups are happy to use this format, but it is important that PCPs take time to address patients' concerns and provide safety-netting advice.

Remote consultations: experiences of UK patients with prostate cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Aim: Explore UK prostate cancer patients' experiences and preferences for in-person and remote consultations. Materials & methods: In January-March 2021, patients completed a survey of consultation format preferences. Results: Of 971 patients, most preferred in-person consultations when receiving diagnosis and results (92.3% and 66.5%, respectively) and discussing first and further treatment options (92.0 and 84.0%, respectively). Fewer patients considered follow-up (40.9%) or side effect consultations (47.7%) should be in person. Patients with longer travel preferred telephone consultations for receiving test results post-treatment. Patients over 55 preferred in-person consultations for discussing first treatment. Conclusion: To optimize prostate cancer care in the wake of COVID-19, we recommend patients have the option of consultation format, although key decisions should be made in person.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a move away from in-person to remote consultations for patients with prostate cancer. However, it is not clear if remote consultations work well for every interaction. We surveyed UK-based men with prostate cancer about their preferences for consultation format. Patients wanted in-person consultations when receiving their diagnosis, discussing treatment options or getting test results after treatment. They were more accepting of remote consultations for regular follow-up or support with treatment side effects. Patients should ideally be offered a choice between in-person and remote consultations, although consultations should be in person when key decisions have to be made. These findings will be of value in planning care for patients with prostate cancer post pandemic.

A Survey on Patient and Clinician Satisfaction With a Rapidly Implemented Telephone Consultation Service During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

AIM: The novel coronavirus pandemic presented unique challenges to healthcare organisations on an unprecedented scale. Due to the cessation of routine care, the Humberside Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery department implemented a telephone review service to maintain access to care. This survey study was conducted to gain feedback from patients and staff regarding the recently implemented remote telephone consultation service within the Humberside Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery unit. METHODS: A paper questionnaire comprising 16 questions was posted to 199 patients who underwent telephone review. A further questionnaire was sent via SurveyMonkey (Momentive Inc., San Mateo) to the clinicians involved. RESULTS: From 199 patients, 93 surveys returned were suitable for inclusion; 7 out of 12 staff replied to the survey. The results showed a high level of satisfaction with the service from both groups. There were also suggestions for future additions to the service, including use for new patient consultations, addition of webcam facilities and further streamlining of suitable cases for remote consultation. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated high patient and staff satisfaction with telephone consultations. It showed that over one third (37%) of patients were able to be discharged via telephone consultation, helping to maintain access, free up clinical resources and reduce the need for face-to-face clinical attendance, which has been vital throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We now have suggestions for how this service can be implemented in the longer term within our department, including developing clearer guidelines for inclusion in the service and the possible benefit of video consultation.

A mixed-method study on the provision of remote consultations for non-communicable disease patients during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Latvia: lessons for the future.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged the ability of healthcare systems to ensure the continuity of health services for patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs). The issue of remote consultations has emerged. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, remote consultations were not routinely provided or covered by public health funding in Latvia. This study aimed to describe the dynamics of consultations and the volume of remote consultations provided for patients with particular NCD and explore clinicians' experiences of providing remote consultations during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Latvia. METHODS: A mixed-method study focusing on the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Latvia in Spring 2020 was conducted. Quantitative data from the National Health Services were analysed to assess the dynamics of consultations for patients with selected NCDs. Qualitative data were collected through 34 semi-structured interviews with general practitioners (GPs) and specialists and were analysed using an inductive thematic analysis. Purposive maximum variation sampling was used for participant selection. RESULTS: During the period with the strongest restrictions of scheduled on-site consultations, a decrease in the total number of consultations was observed for a variety of NCDs. A significant proportion of consultations in this period were provided remotely. GPs provided approximately one-third of cancer-related consultations and almost half of consultations for the other selected conditions remotely. Among specialists, endocrinologists had the highest proportion of remote consultations (up to 72.0%), while urologists had the lowest (16.4%). Thematic analysis of the semi-structured interviews revealed five themes: 1) Adjusting in a time of confusion and fear, 2) Remote consultations: safety versus availability, 3) Sacrifice and loss of privacy, 4) Advantages and disadvantages of communication technologies, and 5) Different form of communication and a health literacy challenge. CONCLUSIONS: During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Latvia, disruptions to health care services decreased the total number of consultations for patients with NCDs provided by both GPs and specialists. In this period, remote consultations proved to be an important instrument for ensuring the continuity of health care for patients with NCDs, and the necessity to develop a well-designed system for telemedicine in Latvia was highlighted.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care: A cross-sectional study of Egyptian patients' perspectives and concerns.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, COVID-19 greatly reduced healthcare accessibility and utilization by non-COVID patients including cancer. This study aimed to quantify and characterize cancer care adjustments experienced by cancer patients/survivors; and to explore their concerns, beliefs, and knowledge regarding COVID-19. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a questionnaire distributed through social media patients' groups (June-December 2020). Questionnaire included basic information, care adjustments (in "care provision" and in "treatment plan"), and patients' concerns, beliefs, and knowledge. Data description and analysis were done. RESULTS: Out of 300 participants, there were 68.0% on-treatment and 32.0% in follow-up stage. Care adjustments were reported by 29.7%; mostly in care provision (27.3%) rather than treatment plan (4.9%). Adjustments were less likely to occur when healthcare facility was in governorate other than that of residence (OR:0.53, 95%CI:0.30-0.96, P = 0.037) and more likely with long-standing diagnosis (≥12 months) compared with recent (<3 months) (adjusted-OR:4.13, 95%CI:1.19-14.34, P = 0.026). Lower proportion of on-treatment patients used remote consultation than patients in follow-up [4.4% versus 17.7%, P < 0.001]. Patients were concerned about fulfilling their care visits more than the probable COVID-19 infection (72.3%). It was uncommon to feel that the risk of COVID-19 infection is higher in care places than in the community (27.3%) or to feel safe with remote consultations (34.3%). However, patients increased their infection control practice (64.0%) and the majority were aware of their increased susceptibility to complications (86.0%). Somewhat, they were also concerned about the care quality (57.3%). Many had adequate access to COVID-19 information (69.0%) and their main sources were the Ministry of Health webpage and ordinary media (radio/TV). CONCLUSION: Cancer patients were primarily concerned about fulfilling their planned care and COVID-19 infection was less appreciated. POLICY SUMMARY: Launching of a policy for enhancement of telemedicine experience through more patients' engagement-as essential stakeholders-may be required. To heighten pandemic resilience for cancer care in Egypt, more investment in establishing specialized end-to-end cancer care facilities that ensure continuity of care may be justified.

A UK online survey exploring patient perspectives of remote consultations for managing psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

The use of remote consultations via telephone or video can contribute to the management of people with psoriasis and has allowed continuity of patient care throughout the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, though little is known about the patient experience. The present study aimed to provide insights into the views and experiences of people with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis on their remote consultations during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and develop guidance for patients and healthcare professionals on how to optimise future remote consultations. We conducted a cross-sectional, on-line survey of people with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and Thematic Analysis. Overall, 126 people reported experiences of telephone (92%) or video (8%) consultations. Most participants were satisfied with (78%), and were happy for, remote consultations to continue (21%); few were not (5%). Others did not always want remote consultations (39%) and preferred alternating with face-to-face consultations (18%). Some wanted remote care during the pandemic only (17%). Five themes were identified: (1) Advantages of Remote Consultations; (2) Disadvantages of Remote Consultations plus sub-themes (2.1) Practical Issues and (2.2) the Absence of Non-Verbal Cues and Emotions; (3) Serving a Purpose; and (4) A 'Good' Remote Consultation; and (5) Advice to Other Patients. Remote consultations form an important part of psoriatic disease management, mainly for routine follow-up appointments in patients with stable disease, and in addition to face-to-face consultations. Additional skills training for clinicians could improve the quality of remote consultations.

Telehealth in South Africa: A guide for healthcare practitioners in primary care.

The use of telehealth is becoming a prevalent feature in clinical practice worldwide, partly because of advances in medical and telecommunications technology. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a key driver in justifying the accelerated use of telehealth, leading to healthcare practitioners (HCPs) utilising virtual consultations more avidly. Although challenges remain, recent data have shown that remote consultations are feasible, safe and effective in South Africa (SA) and that HCPs should become proficient in conducting telehealth, virtual or remote consultations. These guidelines are based on the revised Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) General Ethical Guidelines for Good Practice in Telehealth (Booklet 10) and guidelines on remote or video consultations from the University of Oxford, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. These guidelines aim to equip HCPs with the basic knowledge and skills pertaining to medicolegal, communication and practical aspects of telehealth and how to practise telehealth safely and effectively in primary care settings in SA during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Professional perspectives on impacts, benefits and disadvantages of changes made to community continence services during the COVID-19 pandemic: findings from the EPICCC-19 national survey.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic required changes to the organisation and delivery of NHS community continence services which assess and treat adults and children experiencing bladder and bowel difficulties. Although strong evidence exists for the physical and mental health benefits, improved quality of life, and health service efficiencies resulting from optimally organised community-based continence services, recent audits identified pre-pandemic pressures on these services. The aim of this study was to explore professional perceptions of changes made to community continence services due to the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent impacts on practice, care provision and patient experience. METHODS: Online survey of 65 community continence services in England. Thematic analysis using constant comparison of open-ended questions. Frequency counts of closed-ended questions. RESULTS: Sixty-five services across 34 Sustainability and Transformation Partnership areas responded to the survey. Use of remote/virtual consultations enabled continuation of continence care but aspects of 'usual' assessment (examinations, tests) could not be completed within a remote assessment, requiring professionals to decide which patients needed subsequent in-person appointments. Remote appointments could increase service capacity due to their time efficiency, were favoured by some patients for their convenience, and could increase access to care for others. However, the limited ability to complete aspects of usual assessment raised concerns that diagnoses could be missed, or inappropriate care initiated. The format also restricted opportunities to identify non-verbal cues that could inform professional interpretation; and made building a therapeutic relationship between professional and patient more challenging. Remote appointments also posed access challenges for some patient groups. A third of participating services had experienced staff redeployment, resulting in long wait times and some patients being left without care; or reported additional caseload, which had delayed care provision for patients with continence issues. Participants perceived continence care to have been deprioritised, and more generally undervalued, and called for greater recognition of the impact of continence care. CONCLUSIONS: Remote appointments offer efficiency and convenience. However, 'in-person' approaches are highly valued for optimum quality, patient-centred continence care, and good team relationships. Failure to restore redeployed continence staff will diminish patient health and quality of life, with associated costs to the NHS.

Veterinary surgeons', veterinary nurses' and owners' experiences of feline telemedicine consultations during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing provision of veterinary telemedicine consultations, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, little evidence currently exists examining these remote consultations. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore veterinary and cat owner experiences of telemedicine consultations during the pandemic. METHODS: Two questionnaires, one aimed at veterinary professionals and one at cat owners, were launched in September 2020. Questions explored the type of consultation conducted remotely, the perceived advantages and disadvantages of telemedicine, and the role of telemedicine in the future of veterinary practice. RESULTS: Responses were received from 242 veterinary professionals and 98 owners with experience of telemedicine. Monitoring and advice consultations were felt to be most suited to telemedicine. Reduced stress for owners/cats was seen as an advantage of telemedicine, while lack of clinical examination and risk of misdiagnosis were viewed as disadvantages. Most respondents (85.7% [n = 84/98] of owners; 67.4% [n = 163/242] of veterinary professionals) felt practices should continue to offer telemedicine consultations. CONCLUSION: With increasing pet ownership and practice workload, telemedicine may play a crucial role in the future of veterinary practice. Future work should focus on a strategic approach to feline telemedicine, integrating it alongside face-to-face visits and developing technologies to maximise its advantages.

General Practice Nurses' experiences of changing care delivery during COVID-19. Implications for future practice: Qualitative study protocol.

AIM: To explore how General Practice Nurses experience implementing change at pace and scale in delivering care during consecutive waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. To evaluate the impact of changes to general practice nurses' working practices on professional wellbeing. BACKGROUND: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, general practice rapidly and extensively changed care delivery. There has been little exploration of the experiences of General Practice Nurses and care delivery, job satisfaction, workload, stress and professional support. DESIGN: A qualitative case study design of three to five general practice case sites will explore General Practice Nurses' experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic. The study was funded and approved by the General Nursing Council Trust in June 2021. University ethics approval was gained in July 2021. Health Research Authority approval has been obtained [IRAS:30353. Protocol number: R23982. Ref 21/HRA/5132. CPMS: 51834]. METHODS: Data will consist of focus groups and/or semi-structured interviews with General Practice Nurses, primary healthcare team members and other key informants. Business/strategy and nurse team meetings relating to workforce planning/review will be observed. Documents will be analysed and routinely collected general practice data will provide descriptive contextualisation at each site. The study will be theoretically underpinned by the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability Framework and data analysed using framework analysis. DISCUSSION: General Practice Nurses have a unique sphere of knowledge and undertake specific work in primary care. This workforce is challenged by recruitment, retention and retirement issues, leading to the loss of highly experienced and knowledgeable professionals. It is important to explore how working practices brought about by Covid-19 affect General Practice Nurses. IMPACT: This study will explore working practices brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic to inform care delivery, patient care and support General Practice Nursing workforce wellbeing and will highlight and mitigate negative aspects of novel and changing care delivery. Key factors in implementing and supporting future practice and change implementation will be developed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CPMS: 51834.