Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33022079›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association2021

Psychiatrist and Psychologist Experiences with Telehealth and Remote Collaborative Care in Primary Care: A Qualitative Study.

Molly Howland, McKenna Tennant, Deborah J Bowen, Amy M Bauer, John C Fortney, Jeffrey M Pyne, Jay Shore, Joseph M Cerimele

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Molly HowlandDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0001-6101-0569
McKenna TennantDepartment of Public Health Genetics, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington.
Deborah J BowenDepartment of Bioethics and Humanities, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.ORCID 0000-0003-2420-4422
Amy M BauerDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
John C FortneyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
Jeffrey M PyneDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Jay ShoreHelen and Arthur E. Johnson Depression Center, Anschutz Medical Campus, Departments of Psychiatry and Family Medicine, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
Joseph M CerimeleDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAvailability of mental health services is limited in the rural United States. Two promising models to reach patients with limited access to care are telehealth referral and collaborative care. The objective of this study was to assess telepsychiatrist- and telepsychologist-level facilitators and barriers to satisfaction with and implementation of these 2 telehealth models in rural settings.

methodsFocus groups were held in 2019 using a semistructured interview guide. Participants were off-site telepsychiatrists (N = 10) and telepsychologists (N = 4) for primary care clinics across 3 states (Washington, Michigan, and Arkansas) involved in a recent pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial. Qualitative analysis occurred inductively by 2 independent coders.

findingsParticipants were satisfied with the models partly owing to good patient rapport and expanding access to care. Teamwork was highlighted as a facilitator in collaborative care and was often related to work with care managers. However, participants described communication with primary care providers as a challenge, especially in the telehealth referral arm. Barriers centered on variability of logistical processes (eg, symptom monitoring, scheduling, electronic medical record processes, and credentialing) among sites. Staff turnover, variable clinic investment, and inadequacy of training were possible explanations for these barriers.

conclusionsParticipants described high motivation to provide team-based, remote care for patients, though they experienced operational challenges. Centralized credentialing, scheduling, and record keeping are possible solutions. These findings are important because consulting psychiatrists and psychologists may play a leadership role in the dissemination of these models.

Indexed as

Mental Health ServicesPsychiatryTelemedicineHumansPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchUnited Statesdelivery of health careintegratedpsychiatryqualitative researchtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID33022079
PMCPMC8518862

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.