Patient Perspectives on Communication Pathways After Orthopedic Surgery and Discharge and Evaluation of Team-Based Digital Communication: Qualitative Exploratory Study.

BACKGROUND: The transition from hospital to home after orthopedic surgery requires smooth communication and coordination between patients and their team of care to avoid fragmented care pathways. Digital communication is increasingly being used to facilitate easy and accessible asynchronous communication between patients and health care professionals across settings. A team-based approach to digital communication may provide optimized quality of care in the postoperative period following orthopedic surgery and hospital discharge. OBJECTIVE: This study was divided into two phases that aimed to (1) explore the perspectives of patients undergoing orthopedic surgery on current communication pathways at a tertiary hospital in Denmark and (2) test and explore patients' experiences and use of team-based digital communication following hospital discharge (eDialogue). METHODS: A triangulation of qualitative data collection techniques was applied: document analysis, participant observations (n=16 hours), semistructured interviews with patients before (n=31) and after (n=24) their access to eDialogue, and exploration of use data. RESULTS: Findings show that patients experience difficult communication pathways after hospital discharge and a lack of information due to inadequate coordination of care. eDialogue was used by 84% (26/31) of the patients, and they suggested that it provided a sense of security, coherence, and proximity in the aftercare rearranging communication pathways for the better. Specific drivers and barriers to use were identified, and these call for further exploration of eDialogue. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, patients evaluated eDialogue positively and suggested that it could support them after returning home following orthopedic surgery.

Health Care Professionals' Perspectives Before and After Use of eDialogue for Team-Based Digital Communication Across Settings: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Orthopedic surgical treatment is a transversal task that requires the active involvement of patients, relatives, and health care professionals (HCPs) across various settings. However, after hospital discharge, communication is challenged and undertaken primarily by phone. New digital communication solutions have the potential to create a space for seamless and patient-centered dialogue across discipline and sector boundaries. When evaluating new communication solutions, knowledge about HCPs' needs and perspectives of use must be explored, as it is they who are responsible for implementing changes in practice. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) investigate HCPs' perceptions of current communication pathways (phase 1) and (2) explore their experiences of using a simple messenger-like solution (eDialogue) for team-based digital communication across settings (phase 2). METHODS: We used a triangulation of qualitative data collection techniques, including document analysis, observations, focus groups, and individual interviews of HCPs before (n=28) and after (n=12) their use of eDialogue. Data collection and analysis were inspired by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to specifically understand facilitators and barriers to implementation as perceived by HCPs. RESULTS: HCPs perceive current communication pathways as insufficient for both patients and themselves. Phone calls are disruptive, and there is a lack of direct communication modalities when communication crosses sector boundaries. HCPs experienced the use of eDialogue as a quick and easy way for timely interdisciplinary interaction with patients and other HCPs across settings; however, concerns were raised about time consumption. CONCLUSIONS: eDialogue can provide needed support for interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral patient-centered communication. However, future studies of this solution should address its impact and the use of resources.

Scoping review protocol to map the use of text-based two-way communication between patients and healthcare professionals after hospital discharge and identify facilitators and barriers to implementation.

INTRODUCTION: After discharge, patients face multiple risks where timely communication with healthcare professionals is required. eHealth has proposed new possibilities for asynchronous text-based two-way communication between patients and healthcare professionals during this time, and studies show positive effects on clinical outcomes, care coordination and patient satisfaction. However, there are challenges to the adoption of text-based two-way communication, potentially undermining the positive effects in clinical practice. Knowledge of these factors may inform future research and implementations. No reviews have provided an overview of the use of text-based two-way communication after discharge and the identified facilitators and barriers. Therefore, the objective of this scoping review is to systematically identify and map available research that assess the use of text-based two-way communication between patients and healthcare professionals after hospital discharge, including facilitators and barriers to implementation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include all studies describing the use of text-based two-way communication between patients and healthcare professionals after discharge from hospital. A preliminary search of PubMed (PubMed.gov), EMBASE (Elsevier), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Library (Wiley), Web of Science (Clarivate) and Scopus (Elsevier) was undertaken on 9 November 2021. The search will be updated for the full scoping review, and reference lists of relevant papers reviewed. Two reviewers will independently screen the literature for inclusion. Data will be extracted and charted in accordance with a data extraction form developed from the research questions and inspired by Consolidated Framework Implementation Research. Findings will be presented in tabular format and a descriptive summary, and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review will not require ethics approval. The dissemination strategy involves peer review publication and presentation at conferences.