Online and telephone access to general practice: a cross-sectional patient survey

The Dynamics of Doctor-Patient Communication During Remote Consultations: Qualitative Study Among Norwegian Contract General Practitioners

BACKGROUND

Patient consultations in general practice are undergoing a digital transformation, embracing diverse modalities such as video, text-based, and telephone consultations. The quality of communication in medical consultations is pivotal for successful outcomes, necessitating a comprehensive assessment of the impact of this transformation on doctor-patient communication and interaction.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to explore general practitioners' (GPs') perspectives on how the communication between Norwegian contract GPs and patients has been affected by the large-scale implementation of remote consultations following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

Five focus groups, comprising 18 purposefully recruited GPs from diverse settings and geographical regions in Norway, were carried out in 2022. We applied thematic analysis guided by the framework proposed by Braun and Clarke.

RESULTS

Six themes resulted from the analysis. First, suitability regarding remote communication is context-dependent: knowing the characteristics of the patient as a person and the clinical relationship is more important than the reason for contact or type of health problem-even more so than during ordinary physical consultations. Second, remote consultations favor a demarcated communication style, "keeping things simple-the one-problem approach," which can increase work effectiveness. Third, a downside of such effective minimalism is that the uncritical use of remote consultations may undermine the quality of care. Communication becomes too transactional, limiting the chances of addressing more implicit and complex issues, with the risk of missing vital information. Fourth, remote modalities can help engage hesitant and vulnerable patients. Fifth, GPs make communicative trade-offs in the name of continuity to be able to maintain relationships with patients they see as vulnerable or fugitive. Finally, there are advantages and dilemmas stemming from text-based consultations. Although they offer benefits such as multimedia-enabled patient expression and sharing of digital information, some concerns include the risk of information loss through triage errors, managing informal language, and ending chat-like interactions between patients and doctors.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of remote consultations has many effects on clinical interaction and communication. Although these modalities can enhance efficiency, there is a discernible risk of compromised retrieval of essential information and unvoiced problems, potentially resulting in unintended consequences. The preservation of continuity of care emerges as a pivotal strategy to mitigate some of these challenges.

Supporting patients to use online services in general practice: focused ethnographic case study

BACKGROUND

In England online services in general practice encompass a range of provision from ordering repeat medication to having a consultation. Some groups of individuals may find accessing and/or using such services difficult and may require 'digital facilitation', that is the range of processes, procedures, and personnel which seeks to support NHS patients in their uptake and use of online services.

AIM

To gain insight, from the perspective of general practice staff and patients/carers, into how and why digital facilitation might lead to benefits, and the key processes involved in supporting patients to use online services.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Eight general practices across England with varied geographical and sociodemographic characteristics were included in the study.

METHOD

This was a focused ethnographic case study of observations and interviews (N = 69).

RESULTS

Typically, digital facilitation was delivered in an ad hoc fashion to individual patients. Online services were delivered via multiple systems each working differently and creating a need for support so that patients could access them. Younger practice staff were expected to deliver support on account of their age, despite there being no evidence of age-related training and experience. It was understood by practice staff that patients with challenging personal circumstances may require specific support to access online services.

CONCLUSION

At present patient use of online services is supported by digital facilitation that is primarily delivered by reception staff. Supporting patients to use online services requires review of how many services are provided and what for, and consideration for the time and effort needed to support patients to use them.

Patients' Use of e-Consultations as an Alternative to Other General Practitioner Services: Cross-Sectional Survey Study

BACKGROUND

e-Consultations, defined as asynchronous text-based messaging, have transformed how patients interact with their general practitioner (GP). While e-consultations can improve patient access to GP care, concerns about increased workload for GPs are raised.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to address three research questions: (1) For what purpose and with what expectations do patients initiate e-consultations? (2) If e-consultations had not been available, what alternative actions would the patient have taken? and (3) How are the alternative actions associated with patient and e-consultation characteristics?

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted through a web-based survey on Helsenorge. Helsenorge is the national citizen portal for digital health services in Norway, including e-consultations with the GP. All users who sent e-consultations through Helsenorge were invited to participate between January and February 2023. The survey addressed questions on users' expectations and experience with e-consultations. The association between patient and e-consultation characteristics and alternative actions to e-consultations were analyzed using multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 13,011 users answered the survey. The most common reason for initiating an e-consultation was requesting a sick certificate (4940/13,011, 38%). Overall, 68.7% (8802/13,011) of respondents expected an answer within 24 hours, and 17.7% (2310/13,011) anticipated that the GP would ask them to attend a physical examination. If e-consultations had not been available, 45.5% (5917/13,011) of respondents would have booked a GP appointment, and 44.9% (5846/13,011) would have called the front desk. Users who expected a quicker response (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% CI 1.46-1.85) and were less concerned about their health issues (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.18-1.40) were more likely to call the front desk. Only 2.5% (323/13,011) of respondents would have contacted out-of-hours services. Users with longer travel time to the GP office (OR 6.08, 95% CI 3.46-10.66) and with a new health problem (OR 2.71, 95% CI 2.09-3.51) were more likely to choose this option. In addition, 4.7% (609/13,011) of the users would not have sought help if e-consultations had not been available. Younger patients (OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.38-3.37) and those with a longer travel time to the GP office (OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.27-3.80) or a new health issue (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.43-2.12) had higher odds for not seeking help.

CONCLUSIONS

e-Consultations were often the patients' first choice of access route, and users expected a fast response. e-Consultations were mostly perceived as an alternative to GP appointments or calling the front desk. Patients with lower availability to the GP office had higher odds of using e-consultations as an alternative to out-of-hours service or waiting and not seeking GP care. Guidance for patient use should be developed to ensure appropriate and safe use. Further research should assess the effect of e-consultations on health outcomes and efficiency.

Patients' suggestions for improvements to text-based e-consultations. An online survey of users of the national health portal in Norway

Background

In recent years, text-based e-consultations have been widely implemented in general practice and are appreciated by patients for their convenience and efficiency. Policymakers aim to enhance patient access to clinical services with the general practitioner (GP) through text-based e-consultations. However, concerns are raised about their efficiency and security. We aimed to investigate users' perceptions of potential improvements in the text-based e-consultation service provided by the national health portal in Norway.

Method

We conducted an online survey among users of text-based e-consultations with the GP on the national health portal Helsenorge. The survey was available from January-February 2023 and consisted of 20 questions. This study focused on the free-text answers to the question "Do you have any suggestions to improve the service?" The framework method was used for a thematic analysis of the answers.

Results

The analysis of 2,954 free-text answers from users of the national e-consultation service resulted in six areas where suggestions for improvement were expressed. According to users, the service would benefit from: (1) a better set-up to facilitate the formulation of the patient's problem, (2) better value for money (in regards to both price and quality), (3) faster response time, (4) improved information and predictability about the status of the e-consultation (e.g., if it is received and when to expect an answer), (5) improvement in technical issues, and (6) improvement of access to dialogue-based services to replace or complement e-consultations.

Conclusion

The analysis of users' suggestions for improvements to the e-consultation service emphasised the need to customise the service to address individual patient needs. Users found a one-size-fits-all approach with mandatory questions, fixed pricing, and inflexible response times less appreciated. Some also felt forced to rely on e-consultations due to the perceived poor availability of other GP services. This highlights the importance of perceiving e-consultations not as a replacement for dialogue-enabled services, but rather as a potentially efficient addition, ensuring a well-tailored setup for appropriate patient use.

Understanding access to general practice through the lens of candidacy: a critical review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Dominant conceptualisations of access to health care are limited, framed in terms of speed and supply. The Candidacy Framework offers a more comprehensive approach, identifying diverse influences on how access is accomplished.

AIM

To characterise how the Candidacy Framework can explain access to general practice - an increasingly fraught area of public debate and policy.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative review guided by the principles of critical interpretive synthesis.

METHOD

We conducted a literature review using an author-led approach, involving iterative analytically guided searches. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they related to the context of general practice, without geographical or time limitations. Key themes relating to access to general practice were extracted and synthesised using the Candidacy Framework.

RESULTS

A total of 229 articles were included in the final synthesis. The seven features identified in the original Candidacy Framework are highly salient to general practice. Using the lens of candidacy demonstrates that access to general practice is subject to multiple influences that are highly dynamic, contingent, and subject to constant negotiation. These influences are socioeconomically and institutionally patterned, creating risks to access for some groups. This analysis enables understanding of the barriers to access that may exist, even though general practice in the UK is free at the point of care, but also demonstrates that a Candidacy Framework specific to this setting is needed.

CONCLUSION

The Candidacy Framework has considerable value as a way of understanding access to general practice, offering new insights for policy and practice. The original framework would benefit from further customisation for the distinctive setting of general practice.

The Use of Online Consultation Systems or Remote Consulting in England Characterized Through the Primary Care Health Records of 53 Million People in the OpenSAFELY Platform: Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The National Health Service (NHS) Long Term Plan, published in 2019, committed to ensuring that every patient in England has the right to digital-first primary care by 2023-2024. The COVID-19 pandemic and infection prevention and control measures accelerated work by the NHS to enable and stimulate the use of online consultation (OC) systems across all practices for improved access to primary care.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to explore general practice coding activity associated with the use of OC systems in terms of trends, COVID-19 effect, variation, and quality.

METHODS

With the approval of NHS England, the OpenSAFELY platform was used to query and analyze the in situ electronic health records of suppliers The Phoenix Partnership (TPP) and Egton Medical Information Systems, covering >53 million patients in >6400 practices, mainly in 2019-2020. Systematized Medical Nomenclature for Medicine-Clinical Terminology (SNOMED-CT) codes relevant to OC systems and written OCs were identified including eConsultation. Events were described by volumes and population rates, practice coverage, and trends before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Variation was characterized among practices, by sociodemographics, and by clinical history of long-term conditions.

RESULTS

Overall, 3,550,762 relevant coding events were found in practices using TPP, with the code eConsultation detected in 84.56% (2157/2551) of practices. Activity related to digital forms of interaction increased rapidly from March 2020, the onset of the pandemic; namely, in the second half of 2020, >9 monthly eConsultation coding events per 1000 registered population were registered compared to <1 a year prior. However, we found large variations among regions and practices: December 2020 saw the median practice have 0.9 coded instances per 1000 population compared to at least 36 for the highest decile of practices. On sociodemographics, the TPP cohort with OC instances, when compared (univariate analysis) to the cohort with general practitioner consultations, was more predominantly female (661,235/1,087,919, 60.78% vs 9,172,833/17,166,765, 53.43%), aged 18 to 40 years (349,162/1,080,589, 32.31% vs 4,295,711/17,000,942, 25.27%), White (730,389/1,087,919, 67.14% vs 10,887,858/17,166,765, 63.42%), and less deprived (167,889/1,068,887, 15.71% vs 3,376,403/16,867,074, 20.02%). Looking at the eConsultation code through multivariate analysis, it was more commonly recorded among patients with a history of asthma (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.131, 95% CI 1.124-1.137), depression (aOR 1.144, 95% CI 1.138-1.151), or atrial fibrillation (aOR 1.119, 95% CI 1.099-1.139) when compared to other patients with general practitioner consultations, adjusted for long-term conditions, age, and gender.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully queried general practice coding activity relevant to the use of OC systems, showing increased adoption and key areas of variation during the pandemic at both sociodemographic and clinical levels. The work can be expanded to support monitoring of coding quality and underlying activity. This study suggests that large-scale impact evaluation studies can be implemented within the OpenSAFELY platform, namely looking at patient outcomes.

Exploring How Patients Are Supported to Use Online Services in Primary Care in England Through "Digital Facilitation": Survey Study

BACKGROUND

Health service policy in many jurisdictions is driving greater investment into digital primary care services. While some patients and practices may benefit, there are concerns that not all are able or wish to access primary care services online. "Digital facilitation" is the "range of processes, procedures, and personnel seeking to support patients in their uptake and use of online services" and may address such concerns.

OBJECTIVE

As part of a multimethod research program, we undertook surveys of practice staff and patients to gain insight into the support being offered by practices and explore patients' experiences of this support.

METHODS

General practices from 4 regions of England were sent a questionnaire exploring the modes of digital facilitation offered, the personnel involved in its delivery, and views on the motivations and drivers for providing support. Moreover, 12,822 patients registered with 62 general practices (predominantly those providing practice survey responses) were sent a questionnaire exploring their experiences of any support offered by their practice to use online services.

RESULTS

Almost one-third of practices (156/500, 31.2%) responded to the practice survey, with most reporting using passive modes of digital facilitation (eg, display, leaflets, and SMS text messages) and few using active modes (eg, offering tablets or computers or using practice champions). However, 90.9% (130/143) reported providing ad hoc support. Practices agreed that it was the responsibility of both the practice (105/144, 72.9%) and the wider National Health Service (118/143, 82.5%) to support patients in using online services and that providing such support benefited the practice (126/144, 87.5%) and their patients (132/144, 91.7%). Nearly a quarter of the patients (3051/12,822, 23.8%) responded to the patient survey, with few (522/3051, 17.11% or less) reporting awareness of any modes of digital facilitation apart from text messages and emails (1205/3051, 39.5%) and only 13.36% (392/2935) reporting receiving support to use online services. Adjusted logistic regression analyses showed that older patients had a lower likelihood of 4 outcomes: being aware of, or of using, digital facilitation efforts, or being told about or being helped to use online services (all P<.05), particularly with regard to being helped to use online services (adjusted odds ratio for patients aged 85 years versus those aged 55-64 years: 0.08, 95% CI 0.02-0.36). However, ethnic minority participants or those for whom their first language was not English had positive associations with these outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

General practices recognize that patients would benefit from support to access online services. However, the support provided is often passive or ad hoc, and patients were seldom aware of digital facilitation efforts that their practice provided. There is potential to increase engagement with online primary care services by providing more support for all patients, particularly to provide targeted support for older patients.

Investigating Patient Use and Experience of Online Appointment Booking in Primary Care: Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Online appointment booking is a commonly used tool in several industries. There is limited evidence about the benefits and challenges of using online appointment booking in health care settings. Potential benefits include convenience and the ability to track appointments, although some groups of patients may find it harder to engage with online appointment booking. We sought to understand how patients in England used and experienced online appointment booking.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to describe and compare the characteristics of patients in relation to their use of online appointment booking in general practice and investigate patients' views regarding online appointment booking arrangements.

METHODS

This was a mixed methods study set in English general practice comprising a retrospective analysis of the General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) and semistructured interviews with patients. Data used in the retrospective analysis comprised responses to the 2018 and 2019 GPPS analyzed using mixed-effects logistic regression. Semistructured interviews with purposively sampled patients from 11 general practices in England explored experiences of and views on online appointment booking. Framework analysis was used to allow for comparison with the findings of the retrospective analysis.

RESULTS

The retrospective analysis included 1,327,693 GPPS responders (2018-2019 combined). We conducted 43 interviews with patients with a variety of experiences and awareness of online appointment booking; of these 43 patients, 6 (14%) were from ethnic minority groups. In the retrospective analysis, more patients were aware that online appointment booking was available (581,224/1,288,341, 45.11%) than had experience using it (203,184/1,301,694, 15.61%). There were deprivation gradients for awareness and use and a substantial decline in both awareness and use in patients aged >75 years. For interview participants, age and life stage were factors influencing experiences and perceptions, working patients valued convenience, and older patients preferred to use the telephone. Patients with long-term conditions were more aware of (odds ratio [OR] 1.43, 95% CI 1.41-1.44) and more likely to use (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.63-1.67) online appointment booking. Interview participants with long-term conditions described online appointment booking as useful for routine nonurgent appointments. Patients in deprived areas were clustered in practices with low awareness and use of online appointment booking among GPPS respondents (OR for use 0.65, 95% CI 0.64-0.67). Other key findings included the influence of the availability of appointments online and differences in the registration process for accessing online booking.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether and how patients engage with online appointment booking is influenced by the practice with which they are registered, whether they live with long-term conditions, and their deprivation status. These factors should be considered in designing and implementing online appointment booking and have implications for patient engagement with the wider range of online services offered in general practice.

Dutch GP healthcare consumption in COVID-19 heterogeneous regions: an interregional time-series approach in 2020-2021

BACKGROUND

Many countries observed a sharp decline in the use of general practice services after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, research has not yet considered how changes in healthcare consumption varied among regions with the same restrictive measures but different COVID-19 prevalence.

AIM

To investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic affected healthcare consumption in Dutch general practice during 2020 and 2021, among regions with known heterogeneity in COVID-19 prevalence, from a pre-pandemic baseline in 2019.

DESIGN & SETTING

Population-based cohort study using electronic health records. The study was undertaken in Dutch general practices involved in regional research networks.

METHOD

An interrupted time-series analysis of changes in healthcare consumption from before to during the pandemic was performed. Descriptive statistics were used on the number of potential COVID-19-related contacts, reason for contact, and type of contact.

RESULTS

The study covered 3 595 802 contacts (425 639 patients), 3 506 637 contacts (433 340 patients), and 4 105 413 contacts (434 872 patients) in 2019, 2020, and 2021, respectively. Time-series analysis revealed a significant decrease in healthcare consumption after the outbreak of the pandemic. Despite interregional heterogeneity in COVID-19 prevalence, healthcare consumption decreased comparably over time in the three regions, before rebounding to a level significantly higher than baseline in 2021. Physical consultations transitioned to phone or digital over time.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare consumption decreased irrespective of the regional prevalence of COVID-19 from the start of the pandemic, with the Delta variant triggering a further decrease. Overall, changes in care consumption appeared to reflect contextual factors and societal restrictions rather than infection rates.

eHealth Literacy and the Use of NHS 111 Online Urgent Care Service in England: Cross-Sectional Survey

BACKGROUND

Many health care systems have used digital technologies to support care delivery, a trend amplified by the COVID-19 pandemic. "Digital first" may exacerbate health inequalities due to variations in eHealth literacy. The relationship between eHealth literacy and web-based urgent care service use is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to measure the association between eHealth literacy and the use of NHS (National Health Service) 111 online urgent care service.

METHODS

A cross-sectional sequential convenience sample survey was conducted with 2754 adults (October 2020-July 2021) from primary, urgent, or emergency care; third sector organizations; and the NHS 111 online website. The survey included the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire (eHLQ), questions about use, preferences for using NHS 111 online, and sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Across almost all dimensions of the eHLQ, NHS 111 online users had higher mean digital literacy scores than nonusers (P<.001). Four eHLQ dimensions were significant predictors of use, and the most highly significant dimensions were eHLQ1 (using technology to process health information) and eHLQ3 (ability to actively engage with digital services), with odds ratios (ORs) of 1.86 (95% CI 1.46-2.38) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.22-1.88), respectively. Respondents reporting a long-term health condition had lower eHLQ scores. People younger than 25 years (OR 3.24, 95% CI 1.87-5.62) and those with formal qualifications (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99) were more likely to use NHS 111 online. Users and nonusers were likely to use NHS 111 online for a range of symptoms, including chest pain symptoms (n=1743, 70.4%) or for illness in children (n=1117, 79%). The users of NHS 111 online were more likely to have also used other health services, particularly the 111 telephone service (χ12=138.57; P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These differences in eHealth literacy scores amplify perennial concerns about digital exclusion and access to care for those impacted by intersecting forms of disadvantage, including long-term illness. Although many appear willing to use NHS 111 online for a range of health scenarios, indicating broad acceptability, not all are able or likely to do this. Despite a policy ambition for NHS 111 online to substitute for other services, it appears to be used alongside other urgent care services and thus may not reduce demand.

Patients' experiences with receiving sick leave certificates via remote consultations in Norway during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationwide online survey

OBJECTIVES

To explore patients' experiences with receiving sick leave certificates via remote consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic and investigate whether there were differences among the types of remote consultation (telephone, video or text).

DESIGN

A nationwide online patient survey consisting of quantitative data supplemented by qualitative opinions conducted in Norway.

SETTING

Primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who received a sick leave certificate via remote consultation in the period from 16 November to 15 December 2020.

RESULTS

Of the 5429 respondents, 3233 (59.6%) received a sick leave certificate via telephone consultation, 657 (12.1%) via video consultation and 1539 (28.3%) via text-based e-consultation. Most respondents (76.8%) were satisfied. Only 10% of the respondents thought that the doctor would have obtained more information through an office appointment. The majority of the respondents (59.6%) found that they had as much time to explain the problem as at an office appointment. Some patients also thought that it was easier to formulate the problem via a remote consultation (18.2%) and agree with the doctor on the sick leave (10.3%).The users of text-based e-consultations were the most satisfied (79.3%, p<0.001) compared with those using telephone or video consultations. Among users of text-based e-consultations, there was a higher proportion of patients who thought that they had more time to explain the problem compared with an office appointment (p<0.001), it was easier to explain the problem (p<0.001) and agree with the doctor (p<0.001). Most respondents would use the same type of remote consultation if they were to contact the general practitioner (GP) for the same problem, with the highest proportion among the users of video consultations (62.1%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients were satisfied with communicating and receiving sick leave certificates via remote consultations. Future studies should investigate patients' and GPs' use and experiences in a postpandemic setting.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the treatment of common infections in primary care and the change to antibiotic prescribing in England

BACKGROUND

There is concern that the COVID-19 pandemic altered the management of common infections in primary care. This study aimed to evaluate infection-coded consultation rates and antibiotic use during the pandemic and how any change may have affected clinical outcomes.

METHODS

With the approval of NHS England, a retrospective cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform analysed routinely collected electronic health data from GP practices in England between January 2019 and December 2021. Infection coded consultations and antibiotic prescriptions were used estimate multiple measures over calendar months, including age-sex adjusted prescribing rates, prescribing by infection and antibiotic type, infection consultation rates, coding quality and rate of same-day antibiotic prescribing for COVID-19 infections. Interrupted time series (ITS) estimated the effect of COVID-19 pandemic on infection-coded consultation rates. The impact of the pandemic on non- COVID-19 infection-related hospitalisations was also estimated.

RESULTS

Records from 24 million patients were included. The rate of infection-related consultations fell for all infections (mean reduction of 39% in 2020 compared to 2019 mean rate), except for UTI which remained stable. Modelling infection-related consultation rates highlighted this with an incidence rate ratio of 0.44 (95% CI 0.36-0.53) for incident consultations and 0.43 (95% CI 0.33-0.54) for prevalent consultations. Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) saw the largest reduction of 0.11 (95% CI 0.07-0.17). Antibiotic prescribing rates fell with a mean reduction of 118.4 items per 1000 patients in 2020, returning to pre-pandemic rates by summer 2021. Prescribing for LRTI decreased 20% and URTI increased 15.9%. Over 60% of antibiotics were issued without an associated same-day infection code, which increased during the pandemic. Infection-related hospitalisations reduced (by 62%), with the largest reduction observed for pneumonia infections (72.9%). Same-day antibiotic prescribing for COVID-19 infection increased from 1 to 10.5% between the second and third national lockdowns and rose again during 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes to consultations and hospital admissions may be driven by reduced transmission of non-COVID-19 infections due to reduced social mixing and lockdowns. Inconsistencies in coding practice emphasises the need for improvement to inform new antibiotic stewardship policies and prevent resistance to novel infections.

A systematic scoping review of digital health technologies during COVID-19: a new normal in primary health care delivery

This scoping review compiled information concerning digital health technologies (DHTs) evolution to support primary health care (PHC) during COVID-19 and lessons for the future of PHC. The identified literature was published during the COVID-19 peak years (2019-2021), retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, as well as hand searched on the internet. Predefined inclusion criteria were used, thematic analysis was applied, and reporting followed the PRISMA for Scoping Reviews. A total of 46 studies were included in the final synthesis (40 articles, one book, two book chapters, one working paper, and two technical reports). These studies scrutinized various aspects of DHTs, entailing 19 types of DHTs with 20 areas of use that can be compressed into five bigger PHC functions: general PHC service delivery (teleconsultations, e-diagnosis, e-prescription, etc.); behavior promotion and digital health literacy (e.g., combating vaccine hesitancy); surveillance functions; vaccination and drugs; and enhancing system decision-making for proper follow-up of ongoing PHC interventions during COVID-19. DHTs have the potential to solve some of the problems that have plagued us even prior to COVID-19. Therefore, this study uses a forward-looking viewpoint to further stimulate the use of evidence-based DHT, making it more inclusive, educative, and satisfying to people's needs, both under normal conditions and during outbreaks. More research with narrowed research questions is needed, with a particular emphasis on quality assurance in the use of DHTs, technical aspects (standards for digital health tools, infrastructure, and platforms), and financial perspectives (payment for digital health services and adoption incentives).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12553-023-00725-7.

Older patients' experiences of access to and use of e-consultations with the general practitioner in Norway: an interview study

OBJECTIVE

To explore older patients' experiences with accessing and using e-consultations to send text-based clinical inquiries to the general practitioner (GP) online.

DESIGN

Qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews. Results were analysed through a six-phase thematic analysis and interpreted through Levesque's framework of patient-centred access to health care.

SETTING

General practice in Norway.

SUBJECTS

Patients aged over 65 years (n = 16) with experience in using e-consultations.

RESULTS

Respondents considered e-consultations as an integrated part of general practice which helped them achieve better access to health care. We identified four themes describing older patients' access to and use of e-consultations: 1) the importance of digital health literacy to learn about and use the service - and the fear of losing it, 2) the high availability of the service as the main advantage, due to the perceived unavailability of physical GP services, 3) the importance of voluntary use of e-consultations, 4) the importance of a trusting relationship with the GP.

IMPLICATIONS

Information about e-consultations and guidelines for suitable use are recommended to ensure equal access to all patients, regardless of their digital health literacy. Availability problems and high work burdens for the GPs could affect the patients' choice for using e-consultations. If e-consultations are used for triage purposes, caution should be taken to avoid a shift in workload from the health secretary to the GP.Key points of articleThe extended use of e-consultations with the general practitioner has raised concerns that the service may not be accessible and suitable for older patients.For older users, e-consultations can represent a positive addition to physical consultation forms due to the high availability of the service in a general practice setting characterised by long waiting times.Digital health literacy is essential to learn about and use the service. Information about the service and how to use it should be available to all patients to ensure equal access.A trusting relationship with the GP is described as essential for older patients to perceive the outcome of e-consultations as appropriate and safe.

Patient experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study in Dutch primary care

BACKGROUND

Changes in primary care provision during the COVID-19 pandemic could have affected patient experience of primary care both positively and negatively.

AIM

To assess the experiences of patients in primary care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN & SETTING

A qualitative study of patients from regions with high and low COVID-19 prevalence in the Netherlands.

METHOD

A qualitative study using a phenomenological framework was performed among purposively sampled patients. Individual semi-structured interviews were performed and transcribed. Data were thematically analysed by means of an inductive approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were interviewed (13 men and 15 women, aged 27-91 years). After thematic analysis, two main themes emerged: accessibility and continuity of primary care. Changes considered positive during the pandemic regarding accessibility and continuity of primary care included having a quieter practice, having more time for consultations, and the use of remote care for problems with low complexity. However, patients also experienced decreases in both care accessibility and continuity, such as feeling unwelcome, the GP postponing chronic care, seeing unfamiliar doctors, and care being segregated.

CONCLUSION

Despite bringing several benefits, patients indicated that the changes to primary care provision during the COVID-19 pandemic could have threatened care accessibility and continuity, which are core values of primary care. These insights can guide primary care provision not only in this and future pandemics, but also when implementing permanent changes to care provision in primary care.

Digital Facilitation to Support Patient Access to Web-Based Primary Care Services: Scoping Literature Review

BACKGROUND

The use of web-based services within primary care (PC) in the National Health Service in England is increasing, with medically underserved populations being less likely to engage with web-based services than other patient groups. Digital facilitation-referring to a range of processes, procedures, and personnel that seek to support patients in the uptake and use of web-based services-may be a way of addressing these challenges. However, the models and impact of digital facilitation currently in use are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify, characterize, and differentiate between different approaches to digital facilitation in PC; establish what is known about the effectiveness of different approaches; and understand the enablers of digital facilitation.

METHODS

Adopting scoping review methodology, we searched academic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) and gray literature published between 2015 and 2020. We conducted snowball searches of reference lists of included articles and articles identified during screening as relevant to digital facilitation, but which did not meet the inclusion criteria because of article type restrictions. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by 2 reviewers. Data from eligible studies were analyzed using a narrative synthesis approach.

RESULTS

A total of 85 publications were included. Most (71/85, 84%) were concerned with digital facilitation approaches targeted at patients (promotion of services, training patients to improve their technical skills, or other guidance and support). Further identified approaches targeted PC staff to help patients (eg, improving staff knowledge of web-based services and enhancing their technical or communication skills). Qualitative evidence suggests that some digital facilitation may be effective in promoting the uptake and use of web-based services by patients (eg, recommendation of web-based services by practice staff and coaching). We found little evidence that providing patients with initial assistance in registering for or accessing web-based services leads to increased long-term use. Few studies have addressed the effects of digital facilitation on health care inequalities. Those that addressed this suggested that providing technical training for patients could be effective, at least in part, in reducing inequalities, although not entirely. Factors affecting the success of digital facilitation include perceptions of the usefulness of the web-based service, trust in the service, patients' trust in providers, the capacity of PC staff, guidelines or regulations supporting facilitation efforts, and staff buy-in and motivation.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital facilitation has the potential to increase the uptake and use of web-based services by PC patients. Understanding the approaches that are most effective and cost-effective, for whom, and under what circumstances requires further research, including rigorous evaluations of longer-term impacts. As efforts continue to increase the use of web-based services in PC in England and elsewhere, we offer an early typology to inform conceptual development and evaluations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020189019; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=189019.

Acceptability of, and preferences for, remote consulting during COVID-19 among older patients with two common long-term musculoskeletal conditions: findings from three qualitative studies and recommendations for practice

Background

Guidance for choosing face-to-face vs remote consultations (RCs) encourages clinicians to consider patient preferences, however, little is known about acceptability of, and preferences for RCs, particularly amongst patients with musculoskeletal conditions. This study aimed to explore the acceptability of, and preferences for, RC among patients with osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis.

Methods

Three UK qualitative studies, exploring patient experiences of accessing and receiving healthcare, undertaken during the pandemic, with people with osteoporosis and rheumatoid arthritis. Study team members agreed a consistent approach to conduct rapid deductive analysis using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) on transcripts from each data set relating to RC, facilitated by group meetings to discuss interpretations. Findings from the three studies were pooled.

Results

Findings from 1 focus group and 64 interviews with 35 people were included in the analysis. Participants’ attitudes to RC, views on fairness (ethicality) and sense-making (intervention coherence) varied according to their needs within the consultation and views of the pandemic. Some participants valued the reduced burden associated with RC, while others highly valued non-verbal communication and physical examination associated with face-to-face consults (opportunity costs). Some participants described low confidence (self-efficacy) in being able to communicate in RCs and others perceived RCs as ineffective, in part due to suboptimal communication.

Conclusions

Acceptability of, and preferences for RC appear to be influenced by societal, healthcare provider and personal factors and in this study, were not condition-dependant. Remote care by default has the potential to exacerbate health inequalities and needs nuanced implementation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05273-1.