Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35147510›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Patient Perspectives of Inpatient Telemedicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Assessment.

Stacie Vilendrer, Sarah Sackeyfio, Eliel Akinbami, Roy Ghosh, Jacklyn Ha Luu, Divya Pathak, Masahiro Shimada, Emmanuelle Elise Williamson, Lisa Shieh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. 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

9 authors.

Stacie VilendrerDivision of Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2317-5973
Sarah SackeyfioDepartment of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5337-3842
Eliel AkinbamiDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1113-654X
Roy GhoshDepartment of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2345-6719
Jacklyn Ha LuuDepartment of Bioinformatics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2685-291X
Divya PathakDepartment of Biochemistry, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9944-2308
Masahiro ShimadaDepartment of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7472-5026
Emmanuelle Elise WilliamsonDepartment of Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1503-9720
Lisa ShiehDivision of Hospital Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2729-315X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelemedicine has been adopted in the inpatient setting to facilitate clinical interactions between on-site clinicians and isolated hospitalized patients. Such remote interactions have the potential to reduce pathogen exposure and use of personal protective equipment but may also pose new safety concerns given prior evidence that isolated patients can receive suboptimal care. Formal evaluations of the use and practical acceptance of inpatient telemedicine among hospitalized patients are lacking.

objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the experience of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 with inpatient telemedicine introduced as an infection control measure during the pandemic.

methodsWe conducted a qualitative evaluation in a COVID-19 designated non-intensive care hospital unit at a large academic health center (Stanford Health Care) from October 2020 through January 2021. Semistructured qualitative interviews focused on patient experience, impact on quality of care, communication, and mental health. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants representing diversity across varying demographics until thematic saturation was reached. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using an inductive-deductive approach.

resultsInterviews with 20 hospitalized patients suggested that nonemergency clinical care and bridging to in-person care comprised the majority of inpatient telemedicine use. Nurses were reported to enter the room and call on the tablet far more frequently than physicians, who typically entered the room at least daily. Patients reported broad acceptance of the technology, citing improved convenience and reduced anxiety, but preferred in-person care where possible. Quality of care was believed to be similar to in-person care with the exception of a few patients who wanted more frequent in-person examinations. Ongoing challenges included low audio volume, shifting tablet location, and inconsistent verbal introductions from the clinical team.

conclusionsPatient experiences with inpatient telemedicine were largely favorable. Although most patients expressed a preference for in-person care, telemedicine was acceptable given the circumstances associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Improvements in technical and care team use may enhance acceptability. Further evaluation is needed to understand the impact of inpatient telemedicine and the optimal balance between in-person and virtual care in the hospital setting.

Indexed as

communicationCOVID-19hospitalinfection controlinpatientpatient experienceperspectivequalitativequality of health caretelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID35147510
PMCPMC8970158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.