Use of digital facilitation to support the use of digital services in general practice in England: An interview study with key stakeholders.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Health Services Research & Policy Pub Date : 2025-01-30 DOI:10.1177/13558196251316446
Bethan Mair Treadgold, Rachel Winder, Helen Atherton, Carol Bryce, John Campbell, Christine Marriott, Jenny Newbould, Stephanie Stockwell, Emma Pitchforth
{"title":"Use of digital facilitation to support the use of digital services in general practice in England: An interview study with key stakeholders.","authors":"Bethan Mair Treadgold, Rachel Winder, Helen Atherton, Carol Bryce, John Campbell, Christine Marriott, Jenny Newbould, Stephanie Stockwell, Emma Pitchforth","doi":"10.1177/13558196251316446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Digital services in primary care are becoming more common, yet access to and use of services can create inequities. Our aim was to explore the drivers, priorities, and evolving policy context influencing digital facilitation in primary care as reported by national, regional and local level stakeholders in England.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted online semi-structured qualitative interviews with stakeholders, including those in NHS England organisations, local commissioners for health care, statutory and third sector organisations, those working within the research community, and digital platform providers. Interviews were analysed using a thematic approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The majority of stakeholders worked in national level roles, in commissioning or statutory and third sector organisations working in relation to digital inclusion and patient access. Demographic inequalities, poor usability of digital primary care services, and low digital skills were perceived to comprise some of the barriers facing patients in accessing and using digital primary care services. Demand pressures in general practice, inconsistent training opportunities in digital services for staff, and conflicting perceptions around who should be responsible in organising digital facilitation were reported as barriers in the organisation and provision of digital facilitation in primary care. Stakeholders shared future visions for digital primary care and recommended focusing on establishing the concept of digital facilitation and promoting the benefits in its adoption.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Policy that is specific to digital facilitation and not just to digital services is required to establish clear lines of responsibility, investment in staff time and training, and the development of digital services that work well for various groups of patients and practice staff. A multi-organisational working team involving decision-makers and those working on the ground in general practice is encouraged to establish principles for supporting patients and staff in accessing and using digital primary care services in the NHS in England.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":" ","pages":"13558196251316446"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196251316446","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Digital services in primary care are becoming more common, yet access to and use of services can create inequities. Our aim was to explore the drivers, priorities, and evolving policy context influencing digital facilitation in primary care as reported by national, regional and local level stakeholders in England.

Methods: We conducted online semi-structured qualitative interviews with stakeholders, including those in NHS England organisations, local commissioners for health care, statutory and third sector organisations, those working within the research community, and digital platform providers. Interviews were analysed using a thematic approach.

Results: The majority of stakeholders worked in national level roles, in commissioning or statutory and third sector organisations working in relation to digital inclusion and patient access. Demographic inequalities, poor usability of digital primary care services, and low digital skills were perceived to comprise some of the barriers facing patients in accessing and using digital primary care services. Demand pressures in general practice, inconsistent training opportunities in digital services for staff, and conflicting perceptions around who should be responsible in organising digital facilitation were reported as barriers in the organisation and provision of digital facilitation in primary care. Stakeholders shared future visions for digital primary care and recommended focusing on establishing the concept of digital facilitation and promoting the benefits in its adoption.

Conclusions: Policy that is specific to digital facilitation and not just to digital services is required to establish clear lines of responsibility, investment in staff time and training, and the development of digital services that work well for various groups of patients and practice staff. A multi-organisational working team involving decision-makers and those working on the ground in general practice is encouraged to establish principles for supporting patients and staff in accessing and using digital primary care services in the NHS in England.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
期刊最新文献
Use of digital facilitation to support the use of digital services in general practice in England: An interview study with key stakeholders. Moral distress: A structural problem with individual solutions. Engagement in child psychiatry department appointments: An analysis of electronic medical records in one safety-net hospital in New England, USA. The appropriateness of self-care policy for urinary tract infections among women from racialised minorities and low-income households in the United Kingdom: A qualitative study. Tools for the identification of victims of domestic abuse and modern slavery in remote services: A systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1