Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34796401›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2022

Patient perspectives and experiences of the rapid implementation of digital consultations during COVID-19 - a qualitative study among women with gynecological cancer.

Mille Guldager Christiansen, Helle Pappot, Charlotte Pedersen, Mary Jarden, Mansoor Raza Mirza, Karin Piil

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Perspectives: Reflections on the use of video consultations.Journal of research in nursing : JRN · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Patients' experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic and the change to telephone consultations in cancer care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Experiences of cancer care in COVID-19: A longitudinal qualitative study.European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society · 2022
    Article
  11. 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

6 authors.

Mille Guldager ChristiansenDepartment of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. mille.guldager.christiansen@regionh.dk.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1507-1130
Helle PappotDepartment of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3570-5372
Charlotte PedersenDepartment of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2337-9511
Mary JardenDepartment of Haematology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3040-8384
Mansoor Raza MirzaDepartment of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7431-6193
Karin PiilDepartment of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7972-4674

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDue to the first COVID-19 outbreak and subsequent restrictions, standard practice for gynecological cancer quickly evolved to include additional digital consultations. Women with gynecological cancer have a high need for information and experience a high symptom burden. We aimed to explore the experiences and perspectives of the rapid implementation of digital consultations during COVID-19.

methodsWe conducted individual telephone interviews with patients with gynecological cancer 1-4 days after a telephone or video consultation during the COVID-19 outbreak in April and May 2020. We applied Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis to analyze the qualitative data.

resultsThirty-two patients with ovarian (50%), cervical (35%), vulvar (12%), and vaginal cancer (3%) participated in the study. The patients experienced that, combined, cancer and COVID-19 restrictions made their situation twice as challenging. In general, the patients valued face-to-face consultations, recommending that they were ideal for the initial appointment to build trust. Overall, there was a willingness to participate in digital consultations because of the restrictions, but the results also showed varying degrees of openness and that individual solutions were favored.

conclusionThe findings of this study show that digital consultations were an accepted alternative during COVID-19. Even though this temporary solution was deemed to be beneficial for practical reasons, patients also experienced digital consultations to be impersonal. A key message is that face-to-face encounters create the foundation to establish a trusting relationship from where a valuable dialogue arises. Digital consultations should therefore be implemented with caution since no one-size-fits-all model is recommended. Among patients with gynecological cancer, however, digital technologies represent a promising and flexible method depending on the purpose of consultations, patient preferences, and needs.

Indexed as

COVID-19NeoplasmsFemaleHumansQualitative ResearchReferral and ConsultationSARS-CoV-2COVID-19Digital consultationsGynecological cancerPatient perspectiveTelephone consultationVideo consultation

Identifiers

PMID34796401
PMCPMC8601371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.