A systematic review of in-person versus remotely delivered interventions for youth with chronic pain.

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a rapid shift from in-person to virtually-delivered care. Many youth with chronic pain have the ability to access care virtually; however, little is known about the efficacy of pain care for youth with chronic pain delivered virtually when compared to in-person. Such evidence is essential to guide youth in making decisions about their care, but also to inform what options health professionals present to youth. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of interventions that are delivered in-person versus virtually for youth with chronic pain. Five databases (i.e., CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, and Web of Science) were searched in October 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials that compare single/multimodal interventions for pediatric chronic pain delivered in-person versus virtually. A total 3638 unique studies were identified through database and other searching, two of which satisfied established criteria for inclusion in this review. Both studies compared psychological interventions delivered virtually versus in-person for youth with chronic pain and showed comparable efficacy across modalities. The planned meta-analyses could not be conducted due to different outcomes within each study that could not be combined. This systematic review highlights a critical gap in the evidence regarding the efficacy of virtually delivered interventions for youth with chronic pain. This evidence is necessary to inform treatment decisions for youth, and further research is required to develop the evidence to inform clinical interventions, especially as virtual treatments continue to be offered.

Patient-reported experiences and outcomes of virtual care during COVID-19: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The onset of COVID-19 has caused an international upheaval of traditional in-person approaches to care delivery. Rapid system-level transitions to virtual care provision restrict the ability of healthcare professionals to evaluate care quality from the patient's perspective. This poses challenges to ensuring that patient-centered care is upheld within virtual environments. To address this, the study's objective was to review how virtual care has impacted patient experiences and outcomes during COVID-19, through the use of patient-reported experience and outcome measures (PREMs and PROMs), respectively. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines to evaluate patient responsiveness to virtual care during COVID-19. Using an exhaustive search strategy, relevant peer-reviewed articles published between January 2020 and 2022 were pulled from MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsychInfo databases. Study quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A patient partner was consulted throughout the study to provide feedback and co-conduct the review. RESULTS: After removing duplicates, 6048 articles underwent title and abstract review, from which 644 studies were included in the full-text review stage. Following this, 102 articles were included in the study. Studies were published in 20 different countries, were predominantly cross-sectional, and reported on the delivery of virtual care in specialized adult outpatient settings. This review identified 29 validated PREMs and 43 PROMs. Several advantages to virtual care were identified, with patients citing greater convenience, (such as saving travel time and cost, less waiting experienced to see care providers) and increased protection from viral spread. Some studies also reported challenges patients and caregivers faced with virtual care, including feeling rushed during the virtual care appointment, lack of physical contact or examination presenting barriers, difficulty with communicating symptoms, and technology issues. CONCLUSION: This review provides supportive evidence of virtual care experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic from patient and caregiver perspectives. This research provides a comprehensive overview of what patient-reported measures can be used to record virtual care quality amid and following the pandemic. Further research into healthcare professionals' perspectives would offer a supportive lens toward a strong person-centered healthcare system.

Implementation of E-Consults in an Integrated Health System for a Value Population.

The adoption of e-consults, a form of formal, asynchronous provider-to-provider communication in which specialty medical advice is sought, has been proven to reduce unnecessary specialty consultations, build provider relationships, and reduce fragmentation of care. While the utilization of e-consults is generally a well-accepted alternative method of incorporating specialist expertise into a patient's plan of care and adoption has become common, the implementation of this disruptive care delivery modality can be challenging. This article seeks to describe the process and operational outcomes of e-consult adoption in an integrated health system with a focus on the benefits in the context of value-based care. Implications of e-consult adoption on referral volumes, wait times, and cancellation rates at the service line level are investigated. E-consult adoption and completion metrics, including utilization, completed versus rejected, turn-around times, and projected cost savings, are also discussed.

How essential are in-person clinic visits during maintenance treatment of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia?

BACKGROUND: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is the most common cancer in children. Treatment consists of an initial intensive phase of chemotherapy, followed by a prolonged period of maintenance chemotherapy intended to reduce the risk of relapse. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the need arose to identify and reduce non-essential hospital visits. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine which proportion of in-person clinic visits during ALL maintenance therapy was associated with a change of management based on the results of the physical examination. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of children receiving maintenance chemotherapy for B-precursor ALL between September 2019 and February 2020 were reviewed. Visits with a new finding on physical examination were divided into those where an in-person assessment was deemed essential versus not essential. Finally, we determined the proportion of essential in-person visits that resulted in a change of management. RESULTS: A total of 240 maintenance visits by 75 children were analyzed. An abnormal finding on physical examination was noted during 20 visits (8.3%). Of those, 14 (5.8%) uncovered a new finding, six (2.5%) were classified as "in-person visit essential," and among those six visits, three (1.2%) resulted in a change of patient management (one for acute otitis media, one for wheezing, and one for limp). CONCLUSION: Our findings support the evaluation of care delivery models other than in-person visits during ALL maintenance therapy. A prospective study is required to delineate criteria, benefits/risks, and families' perspectives associated with virtual care delivery and the optimal frequency of in-person visits.

Patient Satisfaction With Medical and Social Concerns Addressed During Telemedicine Visits.

Purpose The use of telemedicine dramatically increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Assessing patient satisfaction with this mode of healthcare delivery is an important metric of success as it is broadly implemented across various settings. Of additional importance are the ways social determinants of health impact health outcomes, with the first step in determining the scale of this impact being the identification of contributing factors. This study assesses patient satisfaction with the medical and social aspects of the care they receive via telemedicine at a university-affiliated primary care training clinic in Detroit, Michigan. Methods A survey was designed to assess patient satisfaction with the technical aspects of the visit, the visit itself, and with the social determinants screening tool used. During July 2020, 167 patients who had at least one telemedicine visit with a primary care physician from the clinic in the preceding months were contacted to assess their impression of the service provided. The responses were used to evaluate patient satisfaction with the comprehensive care provided via the telemedicine visit. Results Of the 167 patients contacted, 79 (47%) completed the survey. Respondents' age ranged from 18-74 years, with 66% identifying as female and 34% as male. For many, this was their first experience with telemedicine. The vast majority expressed comfort in sharing details about their health concerns via telemedicine, with only 3% reporting they were "uncomfortable." More than half of the patients (60%) felt some level of comfort with telemedicine after their first encounter; 14% stated that they were still uncomfortable, and 26% were neutral. Most of the patients (88%) asserted their willingness to participate in future telemedicine visits. Just under two-thirds (63%) of participants "strongly agreed" that concerns related to their social determinants of health were addressed, and 59% "strongly agreed" that the resources provided by their physician were helpful.  Conclusion This survey evaluates multiple dimensions of patient satisfaction with their physician using technology to deliver a telemedicine visit instead of an in-office visit. Telemedicine was well received, with high satisfaction for addressing medical and social concerns. The results of this study support the use of telemedicine to assess social determinants of health in an underserved minoritized patient population and will help physicians optimize future interactions with patients through telemedicine.

Adapting Evidence-Based Early Psychosis Intervention Services for Virtual Delivery: Protocol for a Pragmatic Mixed Methods Implementation and Evaluation Study.

BACKGROUND: Timely and comprehensive treatment in the form of early psychosis intervention (EPI) has become the standard of care for youth with psychosis. While EPI services were designed to be delivered in person, the COVID-19 pandemic required many EPI programs to rapidly transition to virtual delivery, with little evidence to guide intervention adaptations or to support the effectiveness and satisfaction with virtual EPI services. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the adaptations required to deliver NAVIGATE, a model of coordinated specialty care used in EPI, in a virtual format. This study will evaluate implementation of the NAVIGATE model delivered virtually by describing the nature of the adaptations to the intervention, assessing fidelity to the EPI model and the satisfaction of clients, family members, and care providers. We will investigate barriers and facilitators to virtual NAVIGATE implementation, service engagement, and health equity impacts of this work. METHODS: The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) transitioned to delivering NAVIGATE virtually early in the COVID-19 pandemic. The Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications for Evidence-Based Interventions will be used to describe the adaptations required to deliver NAVIGATE virtually. Fidelity to the EPI model will be measured using the First Episode Psychosis Services Fidelity Scale and fidelity to NAVIGATE will be assessed by investigating adherence to its core components. Implementation facilitators and barriers will be explored using semistructured interviews with providers informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Satisfaction with virtually delivered NAVIGATE will be assessed with virtual client and provider experience surveys and qualitative interviews with clients, family members, and providers. Service engagement data will be collected through review of medical records, and potential impacts of virtually delivered NAVIGATE on different population groups will be assessed with the Health Equity Impact Assessment. RESULTS: Virtual clinical delivery of NAVIGATE started in March 2020 with additional adaptations and data collection is ongoing. Data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics and survival analysis for quantitative data. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic content analysis. Integration of qualitative and quantitative data will occur at the data collection, interpretation, and reporting levels following a convergent design. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide information regarding the type of intervention adaptations required for virtual delivery of NAVIGATE for youth with early psychosis, ensuring access to high-quality care for this population during the pandemic and beyond by guiding future implementation in similar contexts. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/34591.