School of Medicine, Keele University, ST55BG, Keele, UK.
Haywood Academic Rheumatology Centre, Haywood Hospital, Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, ST67AG, Stoke-on-Trent, UK.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Apr 2;23(1):312. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05273-1.
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.
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.
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.
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.
选择面对面咨询与远程咨询的指南鼓励临床医生考虑患者的偏好,然而,对于远程咨询的可接受性和偏好,尤其是在患有肌肉骨骼疾病的患者中,知之甚少。本研究旨在探讨骨质疏松症和类风湿关节炎患者对远程咨询的可接受性和偏好。
在疫情期间,进行了三项英国定性研究,旨在探讨患者获取和接受医疗保健的体验,涉及骨质疏松症和类风湿关节炎患者。研究团队成员就使用可接受性理论框架(TFA)对每个数据集与远程咨询相关的转录本进行快速演绎分析达成一致方法,并通过小组会议讨论解释来提供便利。汇总了三项研究的结果。
共纳入了 1 个焦点小组和 64 次访谈,涉及 35 人。参与者对远程咨询的态度、对公平性(伦理性)的看法以及对意义建构(干预一致性)的看法,根据他们在咨询中的需求和对大流行的看法而有所不同。一些参与者重视远程咨询带来的负担减轻,而另一些参与者则非常重视面对面咨询中涉及的非言语交流和体格检查(机会成本)。一些参与者表示在远程咨询中进行交流的信心(自我效能感)较低,而另一些参与者则认为远程咨询无效,部分原因是沟通效果不佳。
远程咨询的可接受性和偏好似乎受到社会、医疗服务提供者和个人因素的影响,在本研究中,这些因素不受疾病状况的影响。远程护理默认情况下有可能加剧健康不平等,需要细致入微的实施。