Mobile consulting as an option for delivering healthcare services in low-resource settings in low- and middle-income countries: A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: Remote or mobile consulting is being promoted to strengthen health systems, deliver universal health coverage and facilitate safe clinical communication during coronavirus disease 2019 and beyond. We explored whether mobile consulting is a viable option for communities with minimal resources in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We reviewed evidence published since 2018 about mobile consulting in low- and middle-income countries and undertook a scoping study (pre-coronavirus disease) in two rural settings (Pakistan and Tanzania) and five urban slums (Kenya, Nigeria and Bangladesh), using policy/document review, secondary analysis of survey data (from the urban sites) and thematic analysis of interviews/workshops with community members, healthcare workers, digital/telecommunications experts, mobile consulting providers, and local and national decision-makers. Project advisory groups guided the study in each country. RESULTS: We reviewed four empirical studies and seven reviews, analysed data from 5322 urban slum households and engaged with 424 stakeholders in rural and urban sites. Regulatory frameworks are available in each country. Mobile consulting services are operating through provider platforms (n = 5-17) and, at the community level, some direct experience of mobile consulting with healthcare workers using their own phones was reported - for emergencies, advice and care follow-up. Stakeholder willingness was high, provided challenges are addressed in technology, infrastructure, data security, confidentiality, acceptability and health system integration. Mobile consulting can reduce affordability barriers and facilitate care-seeking practices. CONCLUSIONS: There are indications of readiness for mobile consulting in communities with minimal resources. However, wider system strengthening is needed to bolster referrals, specialist services, laboratories and supply chains to fully realise the continuity of care and responsiveness that mobile consulting services offer, particularly during/beyond coronavirus disease 2019.

Mobile consulting (mConsulting) and its potential for providing access to quality healthcare for populations living in low-resource settings of low- and middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVE: The poorest populations of the world lack access to quality healthcare. We defined the key components of consulting via mobile technology (mConsulting), explored whether mConsulting can fill gaps in access to quality healthcare for poor and spatially marginalised populations (specifically rural and slum populations) of low- and middle-income countries, and considered the implications of its take-up. METHODS: We utilised realist methodology. First, we undertook a scoping review of mobile health literature and searched for examples of mConsulting. Second, we formed our programme theories and identified potential benefits and hazards for deployment of mConsulting for poor and spatially marginalised populations. Finally, we tested our programme theories against existing frameworks and identified published evidence on how and why these benefits/hazards are likely to accrue. RESULTS: We identified the components of mConsulting, including their characteristics and range. We discuss the implications of mConsulting for poor and spatially marginalised populations in terms of competent care, user experience, cost, workforce, technology, and the wider health system. CONCLUSIONS: For the many dimensions of mConsulting, how it is structured and deployed will make a difference to the benefits and hazards of its use. There is a lack of evidence of the impact of mConsulting in populations that are poor and spatially marginalised, as most research on mConsulting has been undertaken where quality healthcare exists. We suggest that mConsulting could improve access to quality healthcare for these populations and, with attention to how it is deployed, potential hazards for the populations and wider health system could be mitigated.

Digital communication between clinician and patient and the impact on marginalised groups: a realist review in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly, the NHS is embracing the use of digital communication technology for communication between clinicians and patients. Policymakers deem digital clinical communication as presenting a solution to the capacity issues currently faced by general practice. There is some concern that these technologies may exacerbate existing inequalities in accessing health care. It is not known what impact they may have on groups who are already marginalised in their ability to access general practice. AIM: To assess the potential impact of the availability of digital clinician-patient communication on marginalised groups' access to general practice in the UK. DESIGN AND SETTING: Realist review in general practice. METHOD: A four-step realist review process was used: to define the scope of the review; to search for and scrutinise evidence; to extract and synthesise evidence; and to develop a narrative, including hypotheses. RESULTS: Digital communication has the potential to overcome the following barriers for marginalised groups: practical access issues, previous negative experiences with healthcare service/staff, and stigmatising reactions from staff and other patients. It may reduce patient-related barriers by offering anonymity and offers advantages to patients who require an interpreter. It does not impact on inability to communicate with healthcare professionals or on a lack of candidacy. It is likely to work best in the context of a pre-existing clinician-patient relationship. CONCLUSION: Digital communication technology offers increased opportunities for marginalised groups to access health care. However, it cannot remove all barriers to care for these groups. It is likely that they will remain disadvantaged relative to other population groups after their introduction.