Access to Virtual Mental Healthcare and Support for Refugee and Immigrant Groups: A Scoping Review.

Immigrant and refugee populations face multiple barriers to accessing mental health services. This scoping review applies the (Levesque et al. in Int J Equity Health 12:18, 2013) Patient-Centred Access to Healthcare model in exploring the potential of increased access through virtual mental healthcare services VMHS for these populations by examining the affordability, availability/accommodation, and appropriateness and acceptability of virtual mental health interventions and assessments. A search in CINAHL, MEDLINE, PSYCINFO, EMBASE, SOCINDEX and SCOPUS following (Arksey and O'Malley in Int J Soc Res Methodol 8:19-32, 2005) guidelines found 44 papers and 41 unique interventions/assessment tools. Accessibility depended on individual (e.g., literacy), program (e.g., computer required) and contextual/social factors (e.g., housing characteristics, internet bandwidth). Participation often required financial and technical support, raising important questions about the generalizability and sustainability of VMHS' accessibility for immigrant and refugee populations. Given limitations in current research (i.e., frequent exclusion of patients with severe mental health issues; limited examination of cultural dimensions; de facto exclusion of those without access to technology), further research appears warranted.

Assessing Virtual Mental Health Access for Refugees during the COVID-19 Pandemic Using the Levesque Client-Centered Framework: What Have We Learned and How Will We Plan for the Future?

During the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health services rapidly transitioned to virtual care. Although such services can improve access for underserved populations, they may also present unique challenges, especially for refugee newcomers. This study examined the multidimensional nature of access to virtual mental health (VMH) care for refugee newcomers during the COVID-19 pandemic, using Levesque et al.'s Client-Centered Framework for Assessing Access to Health Care. One hundred and eight structured and semi structured interviews were conducted in four Canadian provinces (8 community leaders, 37 newcomer clients, 63 mental health or service providers or managers). Deductive qualitative analysis, based on the Client-Centered Framework, identified several overarching themes: challenges due to the cost and complexity of using technology; comfort for VMH outside clinical settings; sustainability post-COVID-19; and communication and the therapeutic alliance. Mental health organizations, community organizations, and service providers can improve access to (virtual) mental health care for refugee newcomers by addressing cultural and structural barriers, tailoring services, and offering choice and flexibility to newcomers.

Understanding Waste in Health Care: Perceptions of Frontline Physicians Regarding Time Use and Appropriateness of Care They and Others Provide.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 30% of total US health care spending is thought to be "wasted" on activities like unnecessary and inefficiently delivered services. OBJECTIVES: To assess the perceptions of clinic-based physicians regarding their use of time and appropriateness of care provided. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey of all Southern California Permanente Medical Group partner and associate physicians (N = 1034) who were primarily providing clinic-based care in 1 of 4 geographically and operationally distinct Kaiser Permanente Southern California Medical Centers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of time spent on direct patient care tasks perceived to require the respondent's clinical/specialty training as a physician or another physician who has similar years of clinical training (vs physicians with fewer years of clinical training, nonphysicians, or automated or computerized systems), and the proportion of care provided by the respondent and by other physicians with whom they are familiar that is perceived to be appropriate (vs equivocal or inappropriate). RESULTS: More than 61% of respondents indicated that 15% of their time spent on direct patient care could be shifted to nonphysicians, and between 10% and 16% of care provided was equivocal or inappropriate. DISCUSSION: The low proportion of care perceived as equivocal or inappropriate indicates there is little room for reducing such care or that physicians have difficulty assessing care appropriateness. The latter suggests that attempts to reduce or to eliminate inappropriate care may be unsuccessful until physician beliefs, knowledge, or behaviors are better understood and addressed. CONCLUSION: On the basis of these findings, it is apparent that within at least one health care system, the opportunity to increase value through task shifting and avoiding inappropriate care is more narrow than commonly perceived on a national level.

Physician Professional Satisfaction and Area of Clinical Practice: Evidence from an Integrated Health Care Delivery System.

CONTEXT: For health care reform to succeed, health care systems need a professionally satisfied primary care workforce. Evidence suggests that primary care physicians are less satisfied than those in other medical specialties. OBJECTIVE: To assess three domains of physician satisfaction by area of clinical practice among physicians practicing in an established integrated health system. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey of all Southern California Permanente Medical Group (SCPMG) partner and associate physicians (N = 1034) who were primarily providing clinic-based care in 1 of 4 geographically and operationally distinct Kaiser Permanente Southern California Medical Centers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary measure was satisfaction with one's day-to-day professional life as a physician. Secondary measures were satisfaction with quality of care and income. RESULTS: Of the 636 physicians responding to the survey (61.5% response rate), on average, 8 in 10 SCPMG physicians reported satisfaction with their day-to-day professional life as a physician. Primary care physicians were only minimally less likely to report being satisfied (difference of 8.2-9.5 percentage points; p < 0.05) than were other physicians. Nearly all physicians (98.2%) were satisfied with the quality of care they are able to provide. Roughly 8 in 10 physicians reported satisfaction with their income. No differences were found between primary care physicians and those in other clinical practice areas regarding satisfaction with quality of care or income. CONCLUSION: It is possible to create practice settings, such as SCPMG, in which most physicians, including those in primary care, experience high levels of professional satisfaction.