Physician Perspectives about Telemedicine: Considering the Usability of Telemedicine in Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019.

OBJECTIVE: Use of telemedicine in pediatric gastroenterology has increased dramatically in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The goal of this study was to systematically assess the usability of telemedicine in the field of pediatric gastroenterology. METHODS: The previously validated Telehealth Usability Questionnaire was distributed to physician pediatric gastroenterologist members of North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition. Physician demographic and practice characteristics were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive, linear mixed-effect, and ordinary least squares regression methods. RESULTS: One hundred sixty pediatric gastroenterologists completed the survey. The majority were from academic practice (77%) with experience ranging from trainee (11%) to over 20 years of clinical practice (34%). Most (82%) had no experience with telemedicine before the pandemic. The average usability score (scale 1-5) was 3.87 (σ = 0.67) with the highest domain in the usefulness of telemedicine (µâ€Š= 4.29, σ = 0.69) and physician satisfaction (µâ€Š= 4.13, σ = 0.79) and the lowest domain in reliability (µâ€Š= 3.02, σ = 0.87). When comparing trainees to attending physicians, trainees' responses were almost one point lower on satisfaction with telemedicine (trainee effect = -0.97, Bonferroni adjusted 95% confidence interval = -1.71 to -0.23). CONCLUSION: Pediatric gastroenterologists who responded to the survey reported that the technology for telemedicine was usable, but trainees indicated lower levels of satisfaction when compared to attending physicians. Future study is needed to better understand user needs and the impacts of telemedicine on providers with different levels are experience to inform efforts to promote implementation and use of telemedicine beyond the pandemic.

Patients' Perceptions of Portal Use Across Care Settings: Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals are a promising instrument to improve patient-centered care, as they provide patients information and tools that can help them better manage their health. The implementation of portals in both the inpatient and outpatient setting gives health care providers an opportunity to support patients both during hospitalization and after discharge. Thus, there is a need to better understand how inpatient and outpatient portals are used across care contexts. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine patients' perceptions of using inpatient and outpatient portals across the care settings, including how they used the portals and the benefits and concerns associated with portal use. METHODS: This study was conducted in a large Midwestern academic medical center consisting of seven hospitals. We interviewed 120 patients who had used an inpatient portal during their hospitalization, at 15 days and 6 months postdischarge, to determine their perspectives of portal use in both hospital and outpatient settings. Interview transcripts were analyzed inductively and deductively by using team coding processes consistent with a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Interviews focused on three main areas of portal use: experience with the portal features, perceived benefits, and concerns. Responses at 15 days (n=60) and 6 months (n=60) postdischarge were consistent with respect to perceptions about portal use. Patients identified viewing their health information, managing their schedule, and communicating with providers as notable activities. Convenience, access to information, and better engagement in care were indicated as benefits. Concerns were related to technology issues and privacy/security risks. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of inpatient portals as a complement to outpatient portals is increasing and can enable patients to better manage aspects of their care. Although care processes vary substantively across settings, the benefits of convenience, improved access to information, and better engagement in care provide opportunities for portal use across care settings to support patient-centered care.

Engaging staff to improve COVID-19 vaccination response at long-term care facilities (ENSPIRE): A cluster randomized trial of co-designed, tailored vaccine promotion materials.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccination rates among long-term care center (LTCC) workers are among the lowest of all frontline health care workers. Current efforts to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake generally focus on strategies that have proven effective for increasing influenza vaccine uptake among health care workers including educational and communication strategies. Experimental evidence is lacking on the comparative advantage of educational strategies to improve vaccine acceptance and uptake, especially in the context of COVID-19. Despite the lack of evidence, education and communication strategies are recommended to improve COVID-19 vaccination rates and decrease vaccine hesitancy (VH), especially strategies using tailored messaging for disproportionately affected populations. METHODS: We describe a cluster-randomized comparative effectiveness trial with 40 LTCCs and approximately 4000 LTCC workers in 2 geographically, culturally, and ethnically distinct states. We compare the effectiveness of two strategies for increasing COVID-19 booster vaccination rates and willingness to promote COVID-19 booster vaccination: co-design processes for tailoring educational messages vs. an enhanced usual care comparator. Our study focuses on the language and/or cultural groups that are most disproportionately affected by VH and low COVID-19 vaccine uptake in these LTCCs. CONCLUSION: Finding effective methods to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake and decrease VH among LTCC staff is critical. Beyond COVID-19, better approaches are needed to improve vaccine uptake and decrease VH for a variety of existing vaccines as well as vaccines created to address novel viruses as they emerge.

The Role of Palliative Care in Heart Failure, Part 3: Facilitators and Barriers to Cardiac Palliative Care Clinic Development.

Background: Patients with heart failure frequently have significant disease burden and complex psychosocial needs. The integration of palliative care into the management of these patients can decrease symptom burden throughout their course of illness. Therefore, in 2009, we established a cardiac palliative care clinic colocated with heart failure providers in a large academic heart hospital. Objective: To better understand the facilitators and barriers to integrating palliative care into our heart failure management service. Design: Qualitative study using a semistructured interview guide. Setting, Subjects: Between October 2020 and January 2021, we invited all 25 primary cardiac providers at our academic medical center in the midwestern United States to participate in semistructured qualitative interviews to discuss their experiences with the cardiac palliative care clinic. Measurements: Interview transcripts were analyzed using a deductive-dominant thematic analysis approach to reveal emerging themes. Results: Providers noted that the integration of palliative care into the treatment of patients with heart failure was helped and hindered primarily by issues related to operations and communications. Operational themes about clinic proximity and the use of telehealth as well as communication themes around provider-provider communication and the understanding of palliative care were particularly salient. Conclusions: The facilitators and barriers identified have broad applicability that are independent of the etiological nature (e.g., cancer, pulmonary, neurological) of any specialty or palliative care clinic. Moreover, the strategies we used to implement improvements in our clinic may be of benefit to other practice models such as independent and embedded clinics.

The Role of Palliative Care in Heart Failure, Part 1: Referring Provider Perspectives About Opportunities in Advanced Cardiac Therapies.

Background: There are many ways that palliative care can support patients with heart failure, but the role of palliative care in supporting patients who are considering or are already using advanced cardiac therapies is less clear. Objective: To understand referring providers' perspectives about the role of palliative care in the treatment of patients with heart failure considering or using advanced cardiac therapies. Design: Qualitative study using a semistructured interview guide. Setting/Subjects: This study was conducted at an academic medical center in the United States with an integrated cardiac palliative care program. Interviews were conducted with cardiology providers, including cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, and nurse practitioners who care for patients with heart failure and who are considering or receiving advanced cardiac therapies. Measurements: Interview transcripts were analyzed deductively and inductively to reveal themes in providers' perspectives. Results: Five themes were identified about the role of palliative care when advanced therapies were considered or being used: (1) educating patients; (2) supporting goal-concordant care; (3) managing symptoms; (4) addressing psychosocial needs; and (5) managing end-of-life care. Providers suggested palliative care could be a facilitator of advanced therapies, rather than merely something to add to end-of-life care. Conclusions: Cardiology providers recognize the value of integrating palliative care across the heart failure disease trajectory to provide therapy options, support decision-making processes, and provide goal-concordant care for patients considering or receiving advanced therapies. Increasing awareness of opportunities to integrate palliative care throughout the treatment of these patients may help cardiology providers better coordinate with palliative care specialists to improve patient care.

The Role of Palliative Care in Heart Failure, Part 4: A Framework for Collaboration in Advance Care Planning.

Background: Palliative care integration into cardiology is growing, allowing primary cardiology care teams increasing opportunities to utilize palliative care to support processes such as advance care planning (ACP). Objective: The aim of the study is to understand perspectives of cardiac care team members about the involvement and impact of palliative care on ACP in heart failure. Design: A qualitative study using a semistructured interview guide was performed. Settings/Subjects: Interviews were conducted with cardiac care team members, including cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, and nurse practitioners, at a large academic medical center in the United States with an integrated cardiac palliative care team. Measurements: Deductive and inductive thematic analysis of interview transcripts enabled characterization of themes around the role of palliative care in ACP. Results: Two themes were identified with regard to providers' perspectives about ACP: (1) different levels of comfort with initiating and conducting ACP conversations and (2) different opinions about the desired role of palliative care in the ACP process. In exploring these themes, we characterized four distinct approaches to ACP with palliative care as a novel framework for planning consultation. Conclusions: The different approaches to ACP and the implications for how cardiac providers interact with the palliative care team present an important opportunity to guide ACP consultation in practice. Adoption of this framework may help cardiac providers enhance the process of care delivery and ACP in important ways that improve care for their patients.

Pandemic Experience of First Responders: Fear, Frustration, and Stress.

Police officers, firefighters, and paramedics are on the front lines of crises and emergencies, placing them at high risk of COVID-19 infection. A deeper understanding of the challenges facing first responders during the COVID-19 pandemic is necessary to better support this important workforce. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 first responders during the COVID-19 pandemic, asking about the impact of COVID-19. Data collected from our study interviews revealed that, despite large numbers of COVID-19 infections among the staff of police and fire departments, some-but not all-first responders were concerned about COVID-19. A similar divide existed within this group regarding whether or not to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. Many first responders reported frustration over COVID-19 information because of inconsistencies across sources, misinformation on social media, and the impact of politics. In addition, first responders described increased stress due to the COVID-19 pandemic caused by factors such as the fear of COVID exposure during emergency responses, concerns about infecting family members, and frustration surrounding new work policies. Our findings provide insight into the impact of COVID-19 on first responders and highlight the importance of providing resources for education about COVID-19 risks and vaccination, as well as for addressing first responders' mental health and well-being.

The COVID-19 vaccine concerns scale: Development and validation of a new measure.

Reasons for COVID-19 hesitancy are multi-faceted and tend to differ from those for general vaccine hesitancy. We developed the COVID-19 Vaccine Concerns Scale (CVCS), a self-report measure intended to better understand individuals' concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. We validated the scale using data from a convenience sample of 2,281 emergency medical services providers, a group of professionals with high occupational COVID-19 risk. Measures included the CVCS items, an adapted Oxford COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy scale, a general vaccine hesitancy scale, demographics, and self-reported COVID-19 vaccination status. The CVCS had high internal consistency reliability (α = .89). A one-factor structure was determined by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (EFA and CFA), resulting in a seven-item scale. The model had good fit (X2[14] = 189.26, p < .001; CFI = .95, RMSEA = .11 [.09, .12], NNFI = .93, SRMR = .03). Moderate Pearson correlations with validated scales of general vaccine hesitancy (r = .71 , p < .001; n = 2144) and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (r = .82; p < .001; n = 2279) indicated construct validity. The CVCS predicted COVID-19 vaccination status (B = -2.21, Exp(B) = .11 [95% CI = .09, .13], Nagelkerke R2 = .55), indicating criterion-related validity. In sum, the 7-item CVCS is a reliable and valid self-report measure to examine fears and concerns about COVID-19 vaccines. The scale predicts COVID-19 vaccination status and can be used to inform efforts to reduce COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Exploring perspectives on changing opioid prescribing practices: A qualitative study of community stakeholders in the HEALing Communities Study.

BACKGROUND: Community-based perspectives are needed to more broadly inform policy-makers, public health practitioners, prescribers, and pharmacists about community-led and broader efforts to reduce opioid overprescribing, and ultimately reduce prescription opioid use disorder, overdoses and fatalities. The aim of this study is to explore community-based perspectives on efforts to change opioid prescribing practices in their communities. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 388 community stakeholders across four states (Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio) from November 2019 to January 2020 about community approaches and goals of community-led responses to the opioid crisis. Data analysis combined deductive and inductive approaches to identify themes and sub-themes related to improving opioid prescribing practices. RESULTS: Three major themes and different subthemes were characterized: (1) acknowledging progress (i.e., healthcare providers being part of the solution, provider education, and prescription drug monitoring programs); (2) emergent challenges (i.e., physician nonadherence with safer opioid prescribing guidelines, difficulty identifying appropriate use of opioids, and concerns about accelerating the progression from opioid misuse to drug abuse); and (3) opportunities for change (i.e., educating patients about safer use and proper disposal of opioids, expanding prescriber and pharmacist education, changing unrealistic expectations around eliminating pain, expanding and increasing insurance coverage for alternative treatment options). CONCLUSIONS: Community stakeholders appeared to support specific opportunities to reduce prescription opioid misuse and improve safer prescribing. The opportunities included culture change around pain expectations, awareness of safe disposal, additional provider education, and increased coverage and acceptability of non-opioid treatments.

Improving Training Motivation and Transfer in Hospitals: Extension of a Conceptual Model.

Health-care professionals undergo numerous training programs each year in order to fulfill licensure requirements and organizational obligations. However, evidence suggests that a substantial amount of what is taught during training is never learned or transferred back to routine work. A major contributor to this issue is low training motivation. Prior conceptual models on training transfer in the organizational sciences literature consider this deficit, yet do not account for the unique conditions of the hospital setting. This chapter seeks to close this gap by adapting conceptual models of training transfer to this setting that are grounded in organizational science. Based on theory and supplemented by semistructured key informant interviews (i.e., organizational leaders and program directors), we introduce an applied model of training motivation to facilitate training transfer in the hospital setting. In this model, training needs analysis is positioned as a key antecedent to ensure support for training, relevant content, and perceived utility of training. We posit that these factors, along with training design and logistics, enhance training motivation in hospital environments. Further, we suggest that training motivation subsequently impacts learning and transfer, with elements of the work environment also serving as moderators of the learning-transfer relationship. Factors such as external support for training content (e.g., from accrediting bodies) and allocation of time for training are emphasized as facilitators. The proposed model suggests there are factors unique to the hospital work setting that impact training motivation and transfer that should be considered when developing and implementing training initiatives in this setting.

Empowering Patients during Hospitalization: Perspectives on Inpatient Portal Use.

BACKGROUND: Patients have demonstrated an eagerness to use portals to access their health information and connect with care providers. While outpatient portals have been extensively studied, there is a recognized need for research that examines inpatient portals. OBJECTIVE: We conducted this study to improve our understanding about the role of a portal in the context of inpatient care. Our study focused on a large sample of the general adult inpatient population and obtained perspectives from both patients and care team members about inpatient portal use. METHODS: We interviewed patients (n = 120) who used an inpatient portal during their hospitalization at 15 days or 6 months after discharge to learn about their portal use. We also interviewed care team members (n = 331) 4 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months after inpatient portal implementation to collect information about their ongoing perspectives about patients' use of the portal. RESULTS: The perspectives of patients and care team members generally converged on their views of the inpatient portal. Three features-(1) ordering meals, (2) looking up health information, and (3) viewing the care team-were most commonly used; the secure messaging feature was less commonly used and of some concern to care team members. The inpatient portal benefited patients in four main ways: (1) promoted independence, (2) reduced anxiety, (3) informed families, and (4) increased empowerment. CONCLUSION: Inpatient portals are recognized as a tool that can enhance the delivery of patient-centered care. In addition to empowering patients by increasing their sense of control, inpatient portals can support family members and caregivers throughout the hospital stay. Given the consistency of perspectives about portal use across patients and care team members, our findings suggest that inpatient portals may facilitate shifts in organizational culture that increase the patient centeredness of care and improve patient experience in the hospital context.

Understanding Secure Messaging in the Inpatient Environment: A New Avenue for Communication and Patient Engagement.

BACKGROUND: Patient portals, and the secure messaging feature in particular, have been studied in the outpatient setting, but research in the inpatient setting is relatively less mature. OBJECTIVE: To understand the topics discussed in secure messaging in the inpatient environment, we analyzed and categorized messages sent within an inpatient portal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational study examined the content of all secure messages sent from December 2013 to June 2017 within an inpatient portal at a large Midwestern academic medical center (AMC). We analyzed a total of 2,598 messages, categorizing them by sender (patient, family, or care team member), type, and topic, and conducted a descriptive analysis of categories and an examination of code co-occurrence. RESULTS: Patients were the most frequent message senders (63%); family members sent the fewest messages (10%). We identified five types of messages: Alert/Request; Thanks; Response; Question; and Other (typo/test message). Patient messages included Alerts/Requests (38%), Questions (31%), Statements of Thanks (24%), Response (1.2%), and Other (5%). We also identified 14 nonmutually exclusive message topics: Medication; Procedure/Treatment Plan; Schedule; Pain; Results; Diet; Discharge; Non-Medication Questions; Provider Requests; Symptoms; Custodial; Technical Issues; Potential Error; and Contact Information. Patient message topics most commonly discussed Symptoms (18%), Procedure/Treatment Plan (14%), or Pain (12%). CONCLUSION: Our analysis of secure message content suggests certain message types and topics such as Alerts/Requests and Questions about symptoms and treatment plans are particularly important to patients. These findings demonstrate that both patients and family members utilize the secure messaging function to engage in the care process by posing questions, making requests, and alerting staff to problems. As this technology is implemented in additional facilities, future work should examine how use of secure messaging may be influenced by factors including patients' demographics, reasons for hospitalization, and length of stay.