Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35895904›Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2022

Adoption of Telemedicine in a Rural US Cancer Center Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Study.

Matthew Mackwood, Rebecca Butcher, Danielle Vaclavik, Jennifer A Alford-Teaster, Kevin M Curtis, Mary Lowry, Tor D Tosteson, Wenyan Zhao, Anna N A Tosteson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Broadband Data Forensics: Spatiotemporal Variations of the Download/Upload Speed Metric Commonly Used to Evaluate Potential Telehealth Accessibility.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2024
    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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew MackwoodDepartment of Community and Family Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4508-8267
Rebecca ButcherThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6316-4745
Danielle VaclavikThe Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0962-5288
Jennifer A Alford-TeasterDartmouth Cancer Center, Dartmouth Health, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2600-446X
Kevin M CurtisConnected Care, Dartmouth Health, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0264-0485
Mary LowryConnected Care, Dartmouth Health, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6502-2409
Tor D TostesonDepartment of Community and Family Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9302-4762
Wenyan ZhaoDepartment of Biomedical Data Science, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2222-377X
Anna N A TostesonDepartment of Community and Family Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7718-8943
Dartmouth College · USDartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice · USDartmouth Psychiatric Research Center · USDartmouth Health

Funding

Translational Engineering in Cancer (TEC)P30CA023108 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI Steven D Leach · 1985 to 2026
$91.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA023108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid shift to telemedicine to minimize patient and provider exposure risks. While telemedicine has been used in a variety of primary and specialty care settings for many years, it has been slow to be adopted in oncology care. Health care provider and administrator perspectives on factors affecting telemedicine use in oncology settings are not well understood, and the conditions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic offered the opportunity to study the adoption of telemedicine and the resulting provider and staff perspectives on its use.

objectiveThe aim of this paper is to study the factors that influenced telemedicine uptake and sustained use in outpatient oncology clinics at a US cancer center to inform future telemedicine practices.

methodsWe used purposive sampling to recruit a mix of oncology specialty providers, practice managers, as well as nursing and administrative staff representing 5 outpatient oncology clinics affiliated with the Dartmouth Cancer Center, a large regional cancer center in the northeast of United States, to participate in semistructured interviews conducted over 6 weeks in spring 2021. The interview guide was informed by the 5 domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, which include inner and outer setting factors, characteristics of the intervention (ie, telemedicine modality), individual-level factors (eg, provider and patient characteristics), and implementation processes. In total, 11 providers, 3 leaders, and 6 staff participated following verbal consent, and thematic saturation was reached across the full sample. We used a mixed deductive and inductive qualitative analysis approach to study the main influences on telemedicine uptake, implementation, and sustainability during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic across the 5 settings.

resultsThe predominant influencers of telemedicine adoption in this study were individual provider experiences and assumptions about patient preference and accessibility. Providers' early telemedicine experiences, especially if negative, influenced preferences for telephone over video and affected sustained use. Telemedicine was most favorably viewed for lower-acuity cancer care, visits less dependent on physical exam, and for patient and caregiver education. A lack of clinical champions, leadership guidance, and vision hindered the implementation of standardized practices and were cited as essential for telemedicine sustainability. Respondents expressed anxiety about sustaining telemedicine use if reimbursements for telephonic visits diminished or ceased. Opportunities to enhance future efforts include a need to provide additional guidance supporting telemedicine use cases and evidence of effectiveness in oncology care and to address provider concerns with communication quality.

conclusionsIn a setting of decentralized care processes, early challenges in telemedicine implementation had an outsized impact on the nature and amount of sustained use. Proactively designed telemedicine care processes with attention to patient needs will be essential to support a sustained role for telemedicine in cancer care.

Indexed as

clinical oncologyclinical oncology methodsclinical oncology organization and administrationCOVID-19digital healthimplementation scienceoncologyqualitative researchremote consultationtelehealthtelemedicinetelemedicine methodstelemedicine organization and administrationtelemedicine trendsvirtual care

Identifiers

PMID35895904
PMCPMC9384858
OpenAlexW4288073185

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.