Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37253488›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Patient-clinician dynamics in remote consultations: a qualitative study of cardiology and rheumatology outpatient clinics in the UK.

Elisabeth Grey, Frankie Brown, Paula Smith, Daniella Springett, Dan Augustine, Raj Sengupta, Oliver Peacock, Fiona Gillison

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. 'I Do It All Alone': The Burdens and Benefits of Being Diagnosed With, and Treated for, Colorectal Cancer During the Covid-19 Pandemic.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  5. Understanding colorectal cancer patient follow-up: a qualitative interview study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Elisabeth GreyDepartment for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK e.b.grey@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-9719-9690
Frankie BrownDepartment for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Paula SmithDepartment of Psychology, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Daniella SpringettDepartment for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Dan AugustineRoyal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, Bath, UK.
Raj SenguptaThe Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, Bath, UK.
Oliver PeacockDepartment for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Fiona GillisonDepartment for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
University of Bath · GBRoyal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases · GBRoyal United Hospital Bath NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveExplore the experiences of patients and clinicians in rheumatology and cardiology outpatient clinics during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on the impact of remote consultations on interpersonal dynamics.

designQualitative study using semistructured interviews, conducted between February and June 2021.

settingThe rheumatology and cardiology departments of a general hospital in England, UK.

participantsAll clinicians and a convenience sample of 100 patients in each department who had taken part in a remote consultation in the past month were invited to take part. Twenty-five interviews were conducted (13 with patients, 12 with clinicians).

resultsThree themes were developed through the analysis: adapting to the dynamics of remote consultations, impact on the patient's experience and impact on the clinician's experience. The majority of remote consultations experienced by both patients and clinicians had been via telephone. Both clinicians and patients found remote consultations to be more business-like and focused, with the absence of pauses restricting time for reflection. For patients with stable, well-managed conditions, remote consultations were felt to be appropriate and could be more convenient than in-person consultations. However, the loss of visual cues meant some patients felt they could not give a holistic view of their condition and limited clinicians' ability to gather and convey information. Clinicians adjusted their approach by asking more questions, checking understanding more frequently and expressing empathy verbally, but felt patients still shared fewer concerns remotely than in person; a perception with which patients concurred.

conclusionsThese findings highlight the importance of ensuring, for each patient, that remote care is appropriate. Future research should focus on developing ways to support both clinicians and patients to gather and provide all information necessary during remote consultations, to enhance communication and trust.

Indexed as

CardiologyCOVID-19Remote ConsultationRheumatologyAmbulatory Care FacilitiesEnglandHumansPandemicsCARDIOLOGYQUALITATIVE RESEARCHQuality in health careRHEUMATOLOGY

Identifiers

PMID37253488
PMCPMC10254951
OpenAlexW4378782284

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.