Language-Specific Challenges and Solutions for Equitable Telemedicine Implementation in the Primary Care Safety Net During COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Telemedicine care dramatically expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic. We characterized facilitators and barriers to telemedicine implementation among safety-net primary care clinics serving patients with limited English proficiency (LEP). METHODS: We collected data on telemedicine volume and patient demographics among safety-net clinics participating in a telemedicine learning collaborative. Data on various metrics were reported to the collaborative from February 2019 through August 2021. We conducted semi-structured interviews with clinical and quality leaders, purposively sampling clinics serving high proportions of patients with LEP. We analyzed interviews with a mixed inductive-deductive approach applying the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: By September 2020, the 23 sites served 121,589 unique patients with in-person and 120,338 with telephone visits; 47% of these patients had LEP. Of 10,897 unique patients served by video visits, 38% had LEP. As a proportion of total visits, telemedicine (telephone and video) visits increased from 0-17% in October 2019-March 2020 to 10-98% in March-August 2020. We conducted 14 interviews at 11 sites. Themes included (1) existing telemedicine platforms and interpreter services were not optimized to support patients with LEP; (2) clinics invested significant labor iterating workflows; (3) sites with technological infrastructure and language-concordant staff were best suited to serve patients; (4) patients speaking less-represented languages or experiencing intersecting literacy barriers were underserved with telemedicine. Interviewees recommended innovations in telemedicine platforms and community-based access. CONCLUSIONS: Safety-net sites relied on existing resources to accommodate patients with LEP, but struggled providing access for the most marginalized. Proactive, data-driven strategies to address patient and community barriers as well as optimize clinical workflows with high-quality, certified medical interpreters are needed to ensure equitable access.

The Abrupt Expansion of Ambulatory Telemedicine: Implications for Patient Safety.

The exponential growth of telemedicine in ambulatory care triggered by the COVID-19 public health emergency has undoubtedly impacted the quality of care and patient safety. In particular, the increased adoption of remote care has impacted communication, care teams, and patient engagement, which are key factors that impact patient safety in ambulatory care. In this perspective, we draw on a scoping review of the literature, our own clinical experiences, and conversations with patient safety experts to describe how changes in communication, care teams, and patient engagement have impacted two high priority areas in ambulatory safety: diagnostic errors and medication safety. We then provide recommendations for research funders, researchers, healthcare systems, policy makers, and healthcare payors for how to improve patient safety in telemedicine based on what is currently known as well as next steps for how to advance understanding of the safety implications of telemedicine utilization.

Warfarin Monitoring in Safety-Net Health Systems: Analysis by Race/Ethnicity and Language Preference.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic disparities in anticoagulation management are well established. Differences in warfarin monitoring can contribute to these disparities and should be measured. OBJECTIVE: We assessed for differences in international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring by race/ethnicity and language preference across safety-net care systems serving predominantly low-income, ethnically diverse populations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of process and safety data shared from the Safety Promotion Action Research and Knowledge Network (SPARK-Net) initiative, a consortium of five California safety-net hospital systems. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were at least 18 years old, received warfarin for at least 56 days during the measurement period from July 2015 to June 2017, and had INR testing in an ambulatory care setting at a participating healthcare system. MAIN MEASURES: We conducted a scaled Poisson regression for adjusted rate ratio of having at least one INR checked per 56-day time period for which a patient had a warfarin prescription. Adjusting for age, sex, healthcare system, and insurance status/type, we assessed for racial/ethnic and language disparities in INR monitoring. KEY RESULTS: Of 8129 patients, 3615 (44%) were female; 1470 (18%), Black/African American; 3354 (41%), Hispanic/Latinx; 1210 (15%), Asian; 1643 (20%), White; and 452 (6%), other. Three thousand five hundred forty-nine (45%) were non-English preferring. We did not observe statistically significant disparities in the rate of appropriate INR monitoring by race/ethnicity or language; the primary source of variation was by healthcare network. Older age, female gender, and uninsured patients had a slightly higher rate of appropriate INR monitoring, but differences were not clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find a race/ethnicity nor language disparity in INR monitoring; safety-net site was the main source of variation.

Centering Health Equity in Telemedicine.

In the wake of the racial injustices laid bare in 2020, on top of centuries of systemic racism, it is clear we need actionable strategies to fundamentally restructure health care systems to achieve racial/ethnic health equity. This paper outlines the pillars of a health equity framework from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement, overlaying a concrete example of telemedicine equity. Telemedicine is a particularly relevant and important topic, given the growing evidence of disparities in uptake by racial/ethnic, linguistic, and socioeconomic groups in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the new standard of care that telemedicine represents post-pandemic. We present approaches for telemedicine equity across the domains of: (1) strategic priorities of a health care organization, (2) structures and processes to advance equity, (3) strategies to address multiple determinants of health, (4) elimination of institutional racism and oppression, and (5) meaningful partnerships with patients and communities.

Correction to: The impact of patient advisors on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported that reference no. 4 be changed. The details of the correction are as follows.

Patient Engagement in Community Health Center Leadership: How Does it Happen?

Patient engagement in primary care leadership is an important means to involve community voices at community health centers. Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are mandated to have patient representation within their governing boards, while practices seeking patient-centered medical home certification receive credit for implementing patient advisory councils (PACs). Our objective was to compare and contrast how community health centers engage patients in clinic management, decision-making and planning within governing boards versus PACs. Qualitative study conducted from August 2016 to June 2017 at community health centers in California, Arizona and Hawaii. We interviewed practice leaders of patient engagement programs at their site. Eligible clinics had patient representatives within their governing board, PAC, or both. We assessed patient demographics, roles and responsibilities of patients participating, and extent of involvement in quality improvement among governing boards versus PACs. We interviewed 19 sites, of which 17 were FQHCs that had governing boards. Of the 17 FQHCs, 11 had also implemented PACs. Two non-FQHC safety-net sites had PACs but did not have governing boards. Governing board members had formal, structured membership responsibilities such as finances and hiring personnel. PAC roles were more flexible, focusing on day-to-day clinic operations. Clinics tended to recruit governing board patient members for their skill set and professional experience; PAC member recruitment focused more on demographic representation of the clinic's patient population. Both groups worked on quality improvement, but governing boards tended to review clinic performance metrics, while PAC members were involved in specific project planning and implementation to improve clinical outcomes and patient experience. Patient involvement in clinic improvement in CHCs includes higher-level decision-making and governance through mechanisms such as governing boards, as well as engagement in day-to-day practice improvement through PACs. These roles offer differing, but valuable insights to clinic programs and policies.

Engaging patients in primary care practice transformation: theory, evidence and practice.

Patient engagement is a fundamental strategy for achieving patient centred care and is receiving increasing attention in primary care reform efforts such as the patient-centred medical home and related care models. Much of the prior published theory and evidence supporting patient engagement has focused on improving engagement in individual care. Much less is understood about engaging patients as partners in practice improvement at the primary care clinic or practice level. We review the historical and policy context for the growing interest in the USA and UK in patient engagement at the primary care practice level, highlight findings from systematic reviews of the research evidence on practice-level patient engagement and discuss practical considerations for implementing patient engagement. We conclude that while there are persuasive ethical and social justice reasons for empowering patient involvement in practice improvement at the clinic level, research conducted to date in primary care provides suggestive but not yet resounding evidence in support of the instrumental triple aim benefit of practice-level patient engagement. We propose a research agenda to better understand the process and outcomes of practice-level patient engagement and its potential advantages to both the practice and the patients and communities served. Better evidence as well as resources to support and incentivize effective and feasible engagement methods are needed to catalyse greater diffusion of practice-level patient engagement in primary care practices.

The impact of patient advisors on healthcare outcomes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient advisory councils are a way for healthcare organizations to promote patient engagement. Despite mandates to implement patient advisory councils through programs like the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH), there is a paucity of data measuring the impact of patients functioning in advisory roles. Our objective is to investigate whether patient engagement in patient advisory councils is linked to improvements in clinical quality, patient safety or patient satisfaction. METHODS: We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL and Google Scholar for English language publications between November 2002 to August 2015, using a combination of "patient advisor" and "care outcomes" search terms. Article selection utilized dual screening facilitated by DistillerSR software, with group discussion to resolve discordance. Observational studies, randomized controlled trials, and case studies were included that described patients serving in an advisory role where primary outcomes were mentioned. Reference lists of included studies and grey literature searches were conducted. Qualitative thematic analysis was performed to synthesize results. RESULTS: Database searching yielded 639 articles total after removing duplicates, with 129 articles meeting full text inclusion criteria. 32 articles were identified for final review, 16 of which were case studies. Advisory roles included patient advisory councils, ad-hoc patient committees, community advisory councils, experience-based co-design, and other. Four practice-based studies from one research group, involving community advisors in the design of public health interventions, found improved clinical outcomes. No prospective experimental studies assessed the impact of patient advisors on patient safety or patient satisfaction. One cluster-randomized RCT showed that patient advisors helped health care planning efforts identify priorities more aligned with the PCMH. Ten case studies reported anecdotal benefit to individual patient advisors. CONCLUSION: Five included studies demonstrate promising methods for evaluating patient engagement in healthcare delivery and describe impacts on clinical outcomes and priority setting. Based on the case studies found, patient advisors tend to contribute to patient-facing services that may affect clinical care but are not easily evaluated. As clinics and hospitals implement patient advisory councils, rigorous evaluation of their programs is needed to support the expansion of system-level patient engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered in the PROSPERO database of the University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (ID: 2015: CRD42015030020 ).

What Happens After Health Coaching? Observational Study 1 Year Following a Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Health coaching is effective for chronic disease self-management in the primary care safety-net setting, but little is known about the persistence of its benefits. We conducted an observational study evaluating the maintenance of improved cardiovascular risk factors following a health coaching intervention. METHODS: We performed a naturalistic follow-up to the Health Coaching in Primary Care Study, a 12-month randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing health coaching to usual care for patients with uncontrolled diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia. Participants were followed up 24 months from RCT baseline. The primary outcome was the proportion at goal for at least 1 measure (hemoglobin A1c, systolic blood pressure, or LDL cholesterol) that had been above goal at enrollment; secondary outcomes included each individual clinical goal. Chi-square tests and paired t-tests compared dichotomous and continuous measures. RESULTS: 290 of 441 participants (65.8%) participated at both 12 and 24 months. The proportion of patients in the coaching arm of the RCT who achieved the primary outcome dropped only slightly from 47.1% at 12 to 45.9% at 24 months (P = .80). The proportion at goal for hemoglobin A1c dropped from 53.4% to 36.2% (P = .03). All other clinical metrics had small, nonsignificant changes between 12 and 24 months. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the conclusion that most improved clinical outcomes persisted 1 year after the completion of the health coaching intervention.

Patient and caregiver perspectives on causes and prevention of ambulatory adverse events: multilingual qualitative study.

CONTEXT: Ambulatory adverse events (AEs) affect up to 25% of the global population and cause over 7 million preventable hospital admissions around the world. Though patients and caregivers are key actors in promoting and monitoring their own ambulatory safety, healthcare teams do not traditionally partner with patients in safety efforts. We sought to identify what patients and caregivers contribute when engaged in ambulatory AE review, focusing on under-resourced care settings. METHODS: We recruited adult patients, caregivers and patient advisors who spoke English, Spanish and/or Cantonese, from primary care clinics affiliated with a public health network in the USA. All had experience taking or managing a high-risk medication (blood thinners, insulin or opioid). We presented two exemplar ambulatory AEs: one involving a warfarin drug-drug interaction, and one involving delayed diagnosis of colon cancer. We conducted semistructured focus groups and interviews to elicit participants' perceptions of causal factors and potential preventative measures for similar AEs. The study team conducted a mixed inductive-deductive qualitative analysis to derive major themes. FINDINGS: The sample included 6 English-speaking patients (2 in the focus group, 4 individual interviews), 6 Spanish-speaking patients (individual interviews), 4 Cantonese-speaking patients (2 in the focus group, 2 interviews), and 6 English-speaking patient advisors (focus group). Themes included: (1) Patients and teams have specific safety responsibilities; (2) Proactive communication drives safe ambulatory care; (3) Barriers related to limited resources contribute to ambulatory AEs. Patients and caregivers offered ideas for operational changes that could drive new safety projects. CONCLUSIONS: An ethnically and linguistically diverse group of primary care patients and caregivers defined their agency in ensuring ambulatory safety and offered pragmatic ideas to prevent AEs they did not directly experience. Patients and caregivers in a safety net health system can feasibly participate in AE review to ensure that safety initiatives include their valuable perspectives.

What do patients and families observe about pediatric safety?: A thematic analysis of real-time narratives.

OBJECTIVES: Data on inpatient safety are documented by hospital staff through incident reporting (IR) systems. Safety observations from families or patients are rarely captured. The Family Input for Quality and Safety (FIQS) study created a mobile health tool for pediatric patients and their families to anonymously report safety observations in real time during hospitalization. The study objectives were to describe these observations and identify domains salient to safety. METHODS: In this observational study, we analyzed pediatric patient safety reports from June 2017 to April 2018. Participants were: English-speaking family members and hospitalized patients ≥13 years old. The analysis had two stages: (1) assessment of whether narratives met established safety event criteria and whether there were companion IRs; (2) thematic analysis to identify domains. RESULTS: Of 248 enrolled participants, 58 submitted 120 narrative reports. Of the narratives, 68 (57%) met safety event criteria, while only 1 (0.8%) corresponded to a staff-reported IR. Twenty-five percent of narratives shared positive feedback about patient safety efforts; 75% shared constructive feedback. We identified domains particularly salient to safety: (1) patients and families as safety actors; (2) emotional safety; (3) system-centered care; and (4) shared safety domains, including medication, communication, and environment of care. Some domains capture data that is otherwise difficult to obtain (#1-3), while others fit within standard healthcare safety domains (#4). CONCLUSIONS: Patients and families observe and report salient safety events that can fill gaps in IR data. Healthcare leaders should consider incorporating patient and family observations-collected with an option for anonymity and eliciting both positive and constructive comments.

COVID-19-Associated Misinformation Across the South Asian Diaspora: Qualitative Study of WhatsApp Messages.

Background: South Asians, inclusive of individuals originating in India, Pakistan, Maldives, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Bhutan, and Nepal, comprise the largest diaspora in the world, with large South Asian communities residing in the Caribbean, Africa, Europe, and elsewhere. There is evidence that South Asian communities have disproportionately experienced COVID-19 infections and mortality. WhatsApp, a free messaging app, is widely used in transnational communication within the South Asian diaspora. Limited studies exist on COVID-19-related misinformation specific to the South Asian community on WhatsApp. Understanding communication on WhatsApp may improve public health messaging to address COVID-19 disparities among South Asian communities worldwide. Objective: We developed the COVID-19-Associated misinfoRmation On Messaging apps (CAROM) study to identify messages containing misinformation about COVID-19 shared via WhatsApp. Methods: We collected messages forwarded globally through WhatsApp from self-identified South Asian community members between March 23 and June 3, 2021. We excluded messages that were in languages other than English, did not contain misinformation, or were not relevant to COVID-19. We deidentified each message and coded them for one or more content categories, media types (eg, video, image, text, web link, or a combination of these elements), and tone (eg, fearful, well intentioned, or pleading). We then performed a qualitative content analysis to arrive at key themes of COVID-19 misinformation. Results: We received 108 messages; 55 messages met the inclusion criteria for the final analytic sample; 32 (58%) contained text, 15 (27%) contained images, and 13 (24%) contained video. Content analysis revealed the following themes: "community transmission" relating to misinformation on how COVID-19 spreads in the community; "prevention" and "treatment," including Ayurvedic and traditional remedies for how to prevent or treat COVID-19 infection; and messaging attempting to sell "products or services" to prevent or cure COVID-19. Messages varied in audience from the general public to South Asians specifically; the latter included messages alluding to South Asian pride and solidarity. Scientific jargon and references to major organizations and leaders in health care were included to provide credibility. Messages with a pleading tone encouraged users to forward them to friends or family. Conclusions: Misinformation in the South Asian community on WhatsApp spreads erroneous ideas regarding disease transmission, prevention, and treatment. Content evoking solidarity, "trustworthy" sources, and encouragement to forward messages may increase the spread of misinformation. Public health outlets and social media companies must actively combat misinformation to address health disparities among the South Asian diaspora during the COVID-19 pandemic and in future public health emergencies.

Medication adverse events in the ambulatory setting: A mixed-methods analysis.

PURPOSE: To characterize ambulatory care adverse drug events reported to the Collaborative Healthcare Patient Safety Organization (CHPSO), a network of 400 hospitals across the United States, and identify addressable contributing factors. METHODS: We abstracted deidentified ambulatory care CHPSO reports compiled from May 2012 to October 2018 that included medication-related adverse events to identify implicated medications and contributing factors. We dual-coded 20% of the sample. We quantitatively calculated co-occurring frequent item sets of contributing factors and then applied a qualitative thematic analysis of co-occurring sets of contributing factors for each drug class using an inductive analytic approach to develop formal themes. RESULTS: Of 1,244 events in the sample, 208 were medication related. The most commonly implicated medication classes were anticoagulants (n = 97, or 46% of events), antibiotics (n = 24, 11%), hypoglycemics (n = 19, 9%), and opioids (n = 17, 8%). For anticoagulants, timely follow-up on supratherapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) values occurred before the development of symptoms. Incident reports citing antibiotics often described prescribing errors and failure to review clinical contraindications. Reports citing hypoglycemic drugs described low blood sugar events due to a lack of patient education or communication. Reports citing opioids described drug-drug interactions, commonly involving benzodiazepines. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory care prescribing clinicians and community pharmacists have the potential to mitigate harm related to anticoagulants, antibiotics, hypoglycemics, and opioids. Recommendations include increased follow-up for subtherapeutic INRs, improved medical record integration and chart review for antibiotic prescriptions, enhanced patient education regarding hypoglycemics, and alerts to dissuade coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines.

A Root Cause Analysis of Barriers to Timely Colonoscopy in California Safety-Net Health Systems.

OBJECTIVES: Safety-net health care systems, serving vulnerable populations, see longer delays to timely colonoscopy after a positive fecal occult blood test (FOBT), which may contribute to existing disparities. We sought to identify root causes of colonoscopy delay after positive FOBT result in the primary care safety net. METHODS: We conducted a multisite root cause analysis of cases of delayed colonoscopy, identifying cases where there was a delay of greater than 6 months in completing or scheduling a follow-up colonoscopy after a positive FOBT. We identified cases across 5 California health systems serving low-income, vulnerable populations. We developed a semistructured interview guide based on precedent work. We conducted telephone individual interviews with primary care providers (PCPs) and patients. We then performed qualitative content analysis of the interviews, using an integrated inductive-deductive analytic approach, to identify themes related to recurrent root causes of colonoscopy delay. RESULTS: We identified 12 unique cases, comprising 5 patient and 11 PCP interviews. Eight patients completed colonoscopy; median time to colonoscopy was 11.0 months (interquartile range, 6.3 months). Three patients had advanced adenomatous findings. Primary care providers highlighted system-level root causes, including inability to track referrals between primary care and gastroenterology, lack of protocols to follow up with patients, lack of electronic medical record interoperability, and lack of time or staffing resources, compelling tremendous additional effort by staff. In contrast, patients' highlighted individual-level root causes included comorbidities, social needs, and misunderstanding the importance of the FOBT. There was a little overlap between PCP and patient-elicited root causes. CONCLUSIONS: Current protocols do not accommodate communication between primary care and gastroenterology. Interventions to address specific barriers identified include improved interoperability between PCP and gastroenterology scheduling systems, protocols to follow-up on incomplete colonoscopies, accommodation for support and transport needs, and patient-friendly education. Interviewing both patients and PCPs leads to richer analysis of the root causes leading to delayed diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

Family Input for Quality and Safety (FIQS): Using mobile technology for in-hospital reporting from families and patients.

OBJECTIVE: Despite three decades of effort, ensuring inpatient safety remains elusive. Patients and family members are a potential source of safety observations, but systems gathering these are limited. Our goal was to test a system to gather safety observations from hospitalized patients and their family members via a real-time mobile health tool. METHODS: We developed a mobile-responsive website for reporting safety observations. We piloted the tool during June 2017-April 2018 on the medical-surgical unit of a children's hospital. Participants were English-speaking family members and patients ≥13 years. We sent a daily text with a website link. We assessed: (1) face validity by comparing observations to incident reporting (IR) criteria and to hospital IRs and (2) associations between the number of safety observations/100 patient-days and participant characteristics using Poisson regression. RESULTS: We enrolled 235 patients (43.8% of 537 reviewed for eligibility), resulting in 8.15 safety reports/100 patient-days, most frequently regarding medications (29% of reports) and communication (20% of reports). Fifty-one (40% of 125) met IR criteria; only one (1.1%) had been reported via the IR system. Latinx participants submitted fewer observations than White participants (3.9 vs. 10.1, p = .002); participants with more prior hospitalizations submitted more observations (p < .001). In adjusted analyses, including measures of preference in decision making, and patient activation, the difference between Latinx and White participants diminished substantially (6.4 vs. 11.3, p = .16). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the feasibility of real-time patient and family-member technology-enabled safety observation reporting and elicited reports not otherwise identified. Variation in reporting may potentially exacerbate disparities in safety if not addressed.

System-Level Factors Associated With Telephone and Video Visit Use: Survey of Safety-Net Clinicians During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted safety-net health care systems to rapidly implement telemedicine services with little prior experience, causing disparities in access to virtual visits. While much attention has been given to patient barriers, less is known regarding system-level factors influencing telephone versus video-visit adoption. As telemedicine remains a preferred service for patients and providers, and reimbursement parity will not continue for audio visits, health systems must evaluate how to support higher-quality video visit access. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess health system-level factors and their impact on telephone and video visit adoption to inform sustainability of telemedicine for ambulatory safety-net sites. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among ambulatory care clinicians at a hospital-linked ambulatory clinic network serving a diverse, publicly insured patient population between May 28 and July 14, 2020. We conducted bivariate analyses assessing health care system-level factors associated with (1) high telephone adoption (4 or more visits on average per session); and (2) video visit adoption (at least 1 video visit on average per session). RESULTS: We collected 311 responses from 643 eligible clinicians, yielding a response rate of 48.4%. Clinician respondents (N=311) included 34.7% (n=108) primary or urgent care, 35.1% (n=109) medical, and 7.4% (n=23) surgical specialties. Our sample included 178 (57.2%) high telephone adopters and 81 (26.05%) video adopters. Among high telephone adopters, 72.2% utilized personal devices for telemedicine (vs 59.0% of low telephone adopters, P=.04). Video nonadopters requested more training in technical aspects than adopters (49.6% vs 27.2%, P<.001). Primary or urgent care had the highest proportion of high telephone adoption (84.3%, compared to 50.4% of medical and 37.5% of surgical specialties, P<.001). Medical specialties had the highest proportion of video adoption (39.1%, compared to 14.8% of primary care and 12.5% of surgical specialties, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Personal device access and department specialty were major factors associated with high telephone and video visit adoption among safety-net clinicians. Desire for training was associated with lower video visit use. Secure device access, clinician technical trainings, and department-wide assessments are priorities for safety-net systems implementing telemedicine.

Clinician experience with telemedicine at a safety-net hospital network during COVID-19: a cross-sectional survey.

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted unprecedented expansion of telemedicine services. We sought to describe clinician experiences providing telemedicine to publicly-insured, low-income patients during COVID-19. Methods: Online survey of ambulatory clinicians in an urban safety-net hospital system, conducted May 28 2020-July 14 2020. Results: Among 311 participants (response rate 48.3%), 34.7% (N=108/311) practiced in primary/urgent care, 37.0% (N=115/311) medical specialty and 7.7% (N=24/311) surgical clinics. 87.8% (273/311) had conducted telephone visits, 26% (81/311) video. Participants reported observing both technical and non-technical patient barriers. Clinicians reported concerns about the diagnostic safety of telephone (58.9%, 129/219) vs video (35.3%, 24/68). However, clinician comfort with telemedicine was high (89.3% (216/242) for telephone, 91.0% (61/67) for video), with many clinicians (220/239 or 92.1% telephone, 60/66 or 90.9% video) planning to continue telemedicine after COVID-19. Conclusions: Clinicians in a safety-net healthcare system report high comfort with and intention to continue telemedicine after the pandemic, despite patient challenges and safety concerns.

Patient and caregiver factors in ambulatory incident reports: a mixed-methods analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Patients and caregivers are the primary stakeholders in ambulatory safety, given they perform daily chronic disease self-management, medication administration and outpatient follow-up. However, little attention has been given to their role in adverse events. We identified themes related to patient and caregiver factors and challenges in ambulatory safety incident reports from a Patient Safety Organization. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods analysis of ambulatory incident reports submitted to the Collaborative Healthcare Patient Safety Organization, including 450 hospitals or clinic members in 13 US states. We included events that had patient and/or caregiver behavioural, socioeconomic and clinical factors that may have contributed to the event. Two members of the team independently coded patient/caregiver factors, with dual coding of 20% of events. We then conducted a 'frequent item set' analysis to identify which factors most frequently co-occurred. We applied inductive analysis to the most frequent sets to interpret themes. Our team included a diverse stakeholder advisory council of patients, caregivers and healthcare staff. RESULTS: We analysed 522 incident reports and excluded 73 for a final sample of 449 events. Our co-occurrence analysis found the following three themes: (1) clinical advice may conflict with patient priorities; (2) breakdowns in communication and patient education cause medication adverse events and (3) patients with disabilities are vulnerable to the external environment. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory safety reports capture both structural and behavioural factors contributing to adverse events. Actionable takeaways include the following: improving clinician counselling of patients to convey medical advice to elicit priorities, enhanced education regarding medication adverse events and expanding safety precautions for patients with disabilities at home. Ambulatory safety reporting must include patients in reporting and event review for better mitigation of future harm.

A Qualitative Analysis of Outpatient Medication Use in Community Settings: Observed Safety Vulnerabilities and Recommendations for Improved Patient Safety.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to analyze diverse patients' experiences throughout the medication use process to inform the development of overarching interventions that support safe medication use in community settings. METHODS: Using a qualitative observational approach, we conducted approximately 18 hours of direct observation of the medication use process across multiple settings for a sample of vulnerable, high-risk patients. Observers recorded detailed field notes during the observations. To enrich the observational findings, we also conducted six semistructured interviews with medication safety experts representing a diversity of perspectives. Barriers and facilitators to safe medication use were identified based on inductive coding of the data. RESULTS: A variety of safety vulnerabilities plague all stages of the medication use process and many of the well-established evidence-based interventions aimed at improving the safety of medication use at key stages of the process have not been widely implemented in community settings observed in this study. Key safety vulnerabilities identified include: limited English proficiency, low health literacy, lack of clinician continuity, incomplete medication reconciliation and counseling, unsafe medication storage and disposal habits, and conflicting healthcare agendas with caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore a need for overarching, comprehensive interventions that span the entire process of medication use, including integrated communication systems between clinicians, pharmacies, and patients, and a "patient navigator" program that assists patients in navigating the entire medication-taking process. Collective ownership of the medication management system and mutual motivation for devising collaborative solutions is needed among key sectors.