Interpersonal contact and altered sensory conditions in video consultation - a qualitative interview study in Danish general practice.

OBJECTIVE: To explore possible challenges to General Practitioners' (GPs') interpersonal contact with patients in video consultations (VCs), and learn how they change their communication strategies to carry out medical work in a setting with altered sensory conditions. DESIGN, SETTING, SUBJECTS: The study included 6 GPs from the Copenhagen area, with different levels of experience of VC. The data consist of 6 interviews with GPs, held in 2021-2022. The semi-structured interviews included playback of a recorded VC between each GP and a patient, inspired by the Video-Stimulated Interview technique. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). RESULTS: GPs experienced alterations in the sensation of their patients in VCs, and worried about missing something important, including assessing the patient. Generally, GPs felt that interpersonal contact was good enough for the purpose. GPs compensated for altered sensory conditions on video by asking more questions, repeating their advice, and meta-communicating. They used their senses of sight and hearing relatively more in VCs. Compensation also took the form of triage, so that consultations on sensitive topics or with new patients were not selected to take place on video. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: By compensating for altered sensory conditions in VCs, GPs can carry out their medical work sufficiently well and sustain the best possible interpersonal contact. Our findings are useful for establishing ways to maintain good interpersonal contact between GPs and patients in VCs.

Video consultation (VC) implies new opportunities but appears to pose challenges in the communication between health professionals and patients.Altered sensory input affects interpersonal contact between doctors and patients and challenges the use of silent knowledge.Some GPs are concerned that they are unable to fully assess patients in VCs.GPs compensate verbally and non-verbally, and perform triage to keep interpersonal contact good enough for the purpose.

Adjudications and tinkering with care for socially vulnerable patients with type 2 diabetes in general practice.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the mechanisms at play in the adjudications made by professionals and socially vulnerable patients with type 2 diabetes about their eligibility for care. DESIGN, SETTING AND SUBJECTS: The study included 14 patients and 10 health professionals in seven general practice surgeries in deprived areas in Greater Copenhagen. The study data consist of 17 semi-structured interviews with patients and 22 with health professionals immediately after observation of 23 consultations. Our analytical approach was inspired by Systematic Text Condensation and the concept of 'candidacy' for access to health care. RESULTS: Adjudications of patients not being candidates for services were common, but we also found that both patients and health professionals worked to align the services to the needs of the patients. This could include using services differently than was intended by the providers or by changing routines to make it easier for patients to use the services. We discuss these processes as 'tinkering'. This usually implies that the best individual solution for the patient is aimed for, and in this study, the best solution sometimes meant not focusing on diabetes. CONCLUSION: The study adds to existing knowledge about access to services for socially vulnerable patients by demonstrating that both patients and professionals in general practice engage in tinkering processes to make services work.

Unequal use and benefits of health services play a significant role in relation to social inequality in healthFlexibility in services and alternatives to school-like rehabilitation are needed to reduce inequality in access to health carePatients were sometimes judged as unsuitable for available routine services, but professionals 'tinkered' with services to make them fitAdaptation of services by professionals in general practice implies a longer time frame for obtaining goals.

Guidance for Implementing Video Consultations in Danish General Practice: Rapid Cycle Coproduction Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has changed various spheres of health care. General practitioners (GPs) have widely replaced face-to-face consultations with telephone or video consultations (VCs) to reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission. Using VCs for health service delivery is an entirely new way of practicing for many GPs. However, this transition process has largely been conducted with no formal guidelines, which may have caused implementation barriers. This study presents a rapid cycle coproduction approach for developing a guide to assist VC implementation in general practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to describe the developmental phases of the VC guide to assist general practices in implementing VCs and summarize the evaluation made by general practice users. METHODS: The development of a guide for VC in general practice was structured as a stepped process based on the coproduction and prototyping processes. We used an iterative framework based on rapid qualitative analyses and interdisciplinary collaborations. Thus, the guide was developed in small, repeated cycles of development, implementation, evaluation, and adaptation, with a continuous exchange between research and practice. The data collection process was structured in 3 main phases. First, we conducted a literature review, recorded observations, and held informal and semistructured interviews. Second, we facilitated coproduction with stakeholders through 4 workshops with GPs, a group interview with patient representatives, and individual revisions by GPs. Third, nationwide testing was conducted in 5 general practice clinics and was followed by an evaluation of the guide through interviews with GPs. RESULTS: A rapid cycle coproduction approach was used to explore the needs of general practice in connection with the implementation of VC and to develop useful, relevant, and easily understandable guiding materials. Our findings suggest that a guide for VCs should include advice and recommendations regarding the organization of VCs, the technical setup, the appropriate target groups, patients' use of VCs, the performance of VCs, and the arrangements for booking a VC. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of coproduction, prototyping, small iterations, and rapid data analysis is a suitable approach when contextually rich, hands-on guide materials are urgently needed. Moreover, this method could provide an efficient way of developing relevant guide materials for general practice to aid the implementation of new technology beyond the pandemic period.