Real-time remote outpatient consultations in secondary and tertiary care: A systematic review of inequalities in invitation and uptake.

BACKGROUND: Health policies in most high income countries increasingly recommend provision of routine outpatient care via remote (video and/or telephone) appointments, especially due to the pandemic. This is thought to improve access to care and promote efficiency within resource-constrained health services. There is limited evidence about the impact on existing inequalities in the invitation and uptake of health services when remote outpatient care is offered. AIM: To systematically review the evidence on the offer and/or uptake of real-time remote outpatient consultations in secondary and tertiary care, assessed according to key sociodemographic characteristics. METHODS: Seven electronic bibliographic databases were searched for studies reporting the proportion of patients with key characteristics (following PROGRESS Plus criteria) who were offered and/or accepted real-time remote outpatient consultation for any chronic condition. Comparison groups included usual care (face-to-face), another intervention, or offer/uptake within a comparable time period. Study processes were undertaken in duplicate. Data are reported narratively. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included. Uptake of video consultations ranged from 5% to 78% and telephone consultations from 12% to 78%. Patients aged over 65, with lower educational attainment, on lower household incomes and without English as a first language were least likely to have a remote consultation. Females were generally more likely to have remote consultations than males. Non-white ethnicities were less likely to use remote consultations but where they did, were significantly more likely to choose telephone over video appointments (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Offering remote consultations may perpetuate or exacerbate existing health inequalities in access to healthcare. More research is needed on current health disparities by sociodemographic characteristics and to explore what works well for different patient groups and why so that processes can be designed to ameliorate these health disparities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no: CRD42021241791.

How do patients and their family members experience the transition from peritoneal dialysis to incentre haemodialysis? A multisite qualitative study in England and Australia.

BACKGROUND: While numerous studies have explored the patient experience of dialysis or other end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) treatments, few have explored the process of transitioning between dialysis modalities. This study aimed to develop an in-depth understanding of patient and caregiver perceptions and experiences of the transition from peritoneal to haemodialysis (HD) and to identify ways in which transitions can be optimised. METHODS: Fifty-four in-depth, semi-structured interviews were undertaken at six study sites across the West Midlands, UK (n = 23), and Queensland, Australia (n = 31). Thirty-nine participants were patients with ESKD; the remainder were family members. An inductive analytical approach was employed, with findings synthesised across sites to identify themes that transcended country differences. RESULTS: Of the 39 patient transitions, only 4 patients reported a wholly negative transition experience. Three cross-cutting themes identified common transition experiences and areas perceived to make a difference to the treatment transition: resistance to change and fear of HD; transition experience shared with family; and bodily adjustment and sense of self. CONCLUSION: Although each transition is unique to the individual and their circumstances, kidney care services could optimise the process by recognising these patient-led themes and developing strategies that engage with them. Kidney care services should consider ways to keep patients aware of potential future treatment options and present them objectively. There is potential value in integrating expert support before and during treatment transitions to identify and address patient and family concerns.

Adverse outcomes after colposcopy.

BACKGROUND: Colposcopy is an essential part of the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP). It is used for both diagnosis and treatment of pre-cancerous cells of the cervix. Despite colposcopy being a commonly performed and relatively invasive procedure, very little research has explored the potential long-term impacts of colposcopic examination upon patient quality of life.The aim of this study is to investigate and quantify any potential reduction in women's quality of life following a colposcopy procedure. More specifically, the degree of female sexual dysfunction and the excess risk of adverse events in those undergoing colposcopy will be explored. If such risks are identified, these can be communicated to women before undergoing colposcopy. It will also assist in identifying whether there are particular sub-groups at greater risk and if so, this may lead to a re-evaluation of current recommendations concerning colposcopically directed treatments. METHODS/DESIGN: Cohort study using postal surveys to assess sexual function and quality of life in women who have attended for colposcopy (cases), compared with those who have not attended colposcopy (controls). The prevalence and excess risk of female sexual dysfunction will be determined. Logistic regression will identify the predictors of adverse outcomes. DISCUSSION: There are more than 400,000 colposcopy appointments each year in England, of which 134,000 are new referrals. There is some evidence that there may be long-term implications for women treated under colposcopy with respect to adverse obstetric outcomes, persisting anxiety, increased rates of sexual dysfunction and reduced quality of life. Reliably establishing whether such adverse outcomes exist and the excess risk of adverse events will facilitate informed decision-making and patient choice.

Renal staffs' understanding of patients' experiences of transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis and their views on service improvement: A multi-site qualitative study in England and Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Many studies have explored patients' experiences of dialysis and other treatments for kidney failure. This is the first qualitative multi-site international study of how staff perceive the process of a patient's transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis. Current literature suggests that transitions are poorly coordinated and may result in increased patient morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to understand staff perspectives of transition and to identify areas where clinical practice could be improved. METHODS: Sixty-one participants (24 UK and 37 Australia), representing a cross-section of kidney care staff, took part in seven focus groups and sixteen interviews. Data were analysed inductively and findings were synthesised across the two countries. RESULTS: For staff, good clinical practice included: effective communication with patients, well planned care pathways and continuity of care. However, staff felt that how they communicated with patients about the treatment journey could be improved. Staff worried they inadvertently made patients fear haemodialysis when trying to explain to them why going onto peritoneal dialysis first is a good option. Despite staff efforts to make transitions smooth, good continuity of care between modalities was only reported in some of the Australian hospitals where, unlike the UK, patients kept the same consultant. Timely access to an appropriate service, such as a psychologist or social worker, was not always available when staff felt it would be beneficial for the patient. Staff were aware of a disparity in access to kidney care and other healthcare professional services between some patient groups, especially those living in remote areas. This was often put down to the lack of funding and capacity within each hospital. CONCLUSIONS: This research found that continuity of care between modalities was valued by staff but did not always happen. It also highlighted a number of areas for consideration when developing ways to improve care and provide appropriate support to patients as they transition from peritoneal dialysis to in-centre haemodialysis.

The use of herbal medicines by people with cancer: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Between 7% and 48% of cancer patients report taking herbal medicines after diagnosis. Because of the possibility of unwanted side effects or interactions with conventional treatments, people with cancer are generally advised to tell the professionals treating them if they are taking any form of medication, including herbal medicines and supplements. Studies suggest that only about half do so and that the professionals themselves have at best very limited knowledge and feel unable to give informed advice. This study is intended to inform the future development of information resources for cancer patients, survivors and healthcare professionals including tools for use before or during consultation to make it easier for patients to mention, and for healthcare professionals to ask about, use of herbal medications. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a three-phase study. In phase 1, a systematic review of the literature on self-medication with herbal medicines among UK populations living with cancer will establish the current evidence base on use of herbal medicine, sources of information, characteristics and motivations. This will allow us to better understand what aspects need further investigation and inform the topic guide for a qualitative study (phase 2). Six focus groups of six to eight cancer patients who have used at least one herbal preparation since diagnosis will explore behaviour, beliefs, knowledge, information sources and needs in an informal conversational setting.Informed by the findings of the systematic review and qualitative study, in phase 3 we will construct and pilot a questionnaire for a future large-scale survey to quantify and prioritise people's beliefs, needs and information preferences. DISCUSSION: Despite known interactions with conventional cancer treatments and contraindications for some herbal remedies with specific cancers, reliable information resources for patients are very limited. Identifying cancer patients' information needs and preferences is the first step in creating a suitable resource for both the public and the professionals advising them.