ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Telehealth studies have highlighted the positive benefits of having the service in rural areas. However, there is evidence of limited adoption and utilization. Our objective was to evaluate this gap by exploring U.S. healthcare systems' experience in implementing telehealth services in rural hospital emergency departments (TeleED) and by analyzing factors influencing its implementation and sustainability. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 key informants from six U.S. healthcare systems (hub sites) that provided TeleED services to 65 rural emergency departments (spoke sites). All used synchronous high-definition video to provide the service. We applied an inductive qualitative analysis approach to identify relevant quotes and themes related to TeleED service uptake facilitators and barriers. RESULTS: We identified three stages of implementation: 1) the start-up stage; 2) the utilization stage; and 3) the sustainment stage. At each stage, we identified emerging factors that can facilitate or impede the process. We categorized these factors into eight domains: 1) strategies; 2) capability; 3) relationships; 4) financials; 5) protocols; 6) environment; 7) service characteristics; and 8) accountability. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of healthcare innovation can be influenced by multiple factors. Our study contributes to the field by highlighting key factors and domains that play roles in specific stages of telehealth operation in rural hospitals. By appreciating and responding to these domains, healthcare systems may achieve more predictable and favorable implementation outcomes. Moreover, we recommend strategies to motivate the diffusion of promising innovations such as telehealth.
Subject(s)
Emergency Service, Hospital , Telemedicine , Delivery of Health Care , Humans , Qualitative Research , Rural PopulationABSTRACT
Concurrent use of e-cigarettes and cannabis among adolescents and emerging adults is a growing public health concern. More research is needed describing cannabis use among adolescents and emerging adults who vape. The objective of this study was to characterize cannabis use among adolescents and emerging adults (age 14-20) who reported e-cigarette ever-use, particularly their use of blunts and liquid cannabis vape (LCV) products. Using cross-sectional data from a national online survey, we describe their patterns of cannabis use, detail their use of flavored cannabis and tobacco products, and estimate associations of demographic factors and other current substance use behaviors with levels of blunt and LCV use. Of the 2253 respondents in the sample, 1379 (61 %) reported some form of cannabis use in the past 30 days, among whom 80 % used flavored cannabis (including edibles). Significant associations with current cannabis use were observed on several demographic measures, with current cannabis blunt use more frequent among participants not in school, non-Hispanic Blacks, multiracial respondents, and those whose incomes do not meet their expenses. Other than income, demographic characteristics were generally not associated with LCV use frequency. Use of other substances was associated with more frequent use of both blunts and LCV in the past 30 days, and enrollment in college or the military seems somewhat protective for emerging adults. These findings suggest a need for tailored prevention efforts among high-risk adolescents and emerging adults, potential regulation of added flavors in commercialized cannabis products, and stronger enforcement of retail restrictions for individuals under age 21 more broadly.
Subject(s)
Cannabis , Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Tobacco Products , Vaping , Humans , Adult , Adolescent , Young Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , Vaping/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a need to know more about cannabis use among terminally diagnosed older adults, specifically whether it operates as a complement or alternative to palliative care. The objective is to explore differences among the terminal illness population within the Illinois Medical Cannabis Program (IMCP) by their use of palliative care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study uses primary, cross-sectional survey data from 708 terminally diagnosed patients, residing in Illinois, and enrolled in the IMCP. We compared the sample on palliative care utilization through logistic regression models, examined associations between palliative care and self-reported outcome improvements using ordinary least squares regressions, and explored differences in average pain levels using independent t-tests. RESULTS: 115 of 708 terminally diagnosed IMCP participants were receiving palliative care. We find increased odds of palliative care utilization for cancer (odds ratio [OR] [SE] = 2.15 [0.53], p < .01), low psychological well-being (OR [SE] = 1.97 [0.58], p < .05), medical complexity (OR [SE] = 2.05 [0.70], p < .05), and prior military service (OR [SE] = 2.01 [0.68], p < .05). Palliative care utilization is positively associated with improvement ratings for pain (7.52 [3.41], p < .05) and ability to manage health outcomes (8.29 [3.61], p < .01). Concurrent use of cannabis and opioids is associated with higher pain levels at initiation of cannabis dosing (p < .05). DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Our results suggest that cannabis is largely an alternative to palliative care for terminal patients. For those in palliative care, it is a therapeutic complement used at higher levels of pain.