Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37312119›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

Stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

Emer Galvin, Shane Desselle, Blánaid Gavin, Etain Quigley, Mark Flear, Ken Kilbride, Fiona McNicholas, Shane Cullinan, John Hayden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Emer GalvinSchool of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. emergalvin20@rcsi.ie.
Shane DesselleTouro University California, California, CA, USA.
Blánaid GavinSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Etain QuigleyNational University of Ireland, Maynooth, Ireland.
Mark FlearQueen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Ken KilbrideADHD Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Fiona McNicholasSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Shane CullinanSchool of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
John HaydenSchool of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRemote mental health consultations were swiftly implemented across mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Research has begun to inform future design and delivery of telemental health services. Exploring the in-depth experiences of those involved is important to understand the complex, multi-level factors that influence the implementation of remote mental health consultations. The aim of this study was to explore stakeholder perspectives and experiences of the implementation of remote mental health consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland.

methodsA qualitative study was conducted whereby semi-structured, individual interviews were undertaken with mental health providers, service users, and managers (n = 19) to acquire rich information. Interviews were conducted between November 2021 and July 2022. The interview guide was informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were analysed thematically using a deductive and inductive approach.

resultsSix themes were identified. The advantages of remote mental health consultations were described, including convenience and increased accessibility to care. Providers and managers described varying levels of success with implementation, citing complexity and incompatibility with existing workflows as barriers to adoption. Providers' access to resources, guidance, and training were notable facilitators. Participants perceived remote mental health consultations to be satisfactory but not equivalent to in-person care in terms of quality. Views about the inferior quality of remote consultations stemmed from beliefs about the inhibited therapeutic relationship and a possible reduction in effectiveness compared to in-person care. Whilst a return to in-person services was mostly preferred, participants acknowledged a potential adjunct role for remote consultations in certain circumstances.

conclusionsRemote mental health consultations were welcomed as a means to continue care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their swift and necessary adoption placed pressure on providers and organisations to adapt quickly, navigating challenges and adjusting to a new way of working. This implementation created changes to workflows and dynamics that disrupted the traditional method of mental health care delivery. Further consideration of the importance of the therapeutic relationship and fostering positive provider beliefs and feelings of competence are needed to ensure satisfactory and effective implementation of remote mental health consultations going forward.

Indexed as

COVID-19Mental Health ServicesRemote ConsultationHumansMental HealthPandemicsCOVID-19ImplementationRemote consultationsTelemedicineTelemental healthTelepsychiatry

Identifiers

PMID37312119
PMCPMC10262124

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.