Rachelle Ashcroft, B. Ryan, Kavita Mehta, J. Brown, Simon Lam, L. Dolovich, Amélie Boudreault, J. Rayner, J. Grenier, S. Dahrouge, Sally Abudiab, Sandeep Gill, C. Donnelly, J. Alloo, D. Verrilli
{"title":"“Healthcare at its finest”: Patient perspectives on virtual care appointments in primary care","authors":"Rachelle Ashcroft, B. Ryan, Kavita Mehta, J. Brown, Simon Lam, L. Dolovich, Amélie Boudreault, J. Rayner, J. Grenier, S. Dahrouge, Sally Abudiab, Sandeep Gill, C. Donnelly, J. Alloo, D. Verrilli","doi":"10.1370/afm.20.s1.2944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: COVID-19 led to a rapid uptake of virtual care appointments (telephone and video) in primary care (PC). Decisions on the future of virtual care need to consider patien ts’ experiences. Objective: To understand patients’ experience with virtual care appointments. Study Design: Mixed methods study, presentation focus on qualitative data. A semi-structured interview guide was co-created with patient advisors. A broad recruitment strategy included emailing patient and community organizations, research team network, and social media. Data analyzed using thematic analysis. Participant Eligibility: At least one synchronous virtual encounter in PC since March 2020. Setting: Ontario (Canada) offers universal coverage for PC visits with no co-payment. Results: N=55 interviews were conducted between January 2021 and March 2021. Technology: Telephone was preferred modality. Access: Virtual care was convenient and saved patients’ time and money. Appointment scheduling & booking processes were barriers. Privacy and Confidentiality: No concerns about privacy & confidentiality in patients’ environment, yet participants wanted assurance about privacy & confidentiality in providers’ environm ent. Communication: Providers’ detailed explanations, patients’ health literacy levels, and asynchronous methods of sharing information and documents before and/or after appointments facilitated good experiences. Lack of body-language was a barrier. Therapeutic Relationship: Strong pre-existing relationships facilitated good virtual care experiences. Participants expressed concerns about long-term erosion of relationship when using virtual care. Whole-Person Care: Virtual care facilitated easy inclusion of family members in appointments. However, virtual care appointments were more problem-focused and included less conversation topics outside of specific problem","PeriodicalId":10691,"journal":{"name":"Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.20.s1.2944","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Context: COVID-19 led to a rapid uptake of virtual care appointments (telephone and video) in primary care (PC). Decisions on the future of virtual care need to consider patien ts’ experiences. Objective: To understand patients’ experience with virtual care appointments. Study Design: Mixed methods study, presentation focus on qualitative data. A semi-structured interview guide was co-created with patient advisors. A broad recruitment strategy included emailing patient and community organizations, research team network, and social media. Data analyzed using thematic analysis. Participant Eligibility: At least one synchronous virtual encounter in PC since March 2020. Setting: Ontario (Canada) offers universal coverage for PC visits with no co-payment. Results: N=55 interviews were conducted between January 2021 and March 2021. Technology: Telephone was preferred modality. Access: Virtual care was convenient and saved patients’ time and money. Appointment scheduling & booking processes were barriers. Privacy and Confidentiality: No concerns about privacy & confidentiality in patients’ environment, yet participants wanted assurance about privacy & confidentiality in providers’ environm ent. Communication: Providers’ detailed explanations, patients’ health literacy levels, and asynchronous methods of sharing information and documents before and/or after appointments facilitated good experiences. Lack of body-language was a barrier. Therapeutic Relationship: Strong pre-existing relationships facilitated good virtual care experiences. Participants expressed concerns about long-term erosion of relationship when using virtual care. Whole-Person Care: Virtual care facilitated easy inclusion of family members in appointments. However, virtual care appointments were more problem-focused and included less conversation topics outside of specific problem