Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38038800›Full record

SynthesisJournal of patient-reported outcomes2023

Patient-reported experiences and outcomes of virtual care during COVID-19: a systematic review.

Bishnu Bajgain, Sarah Rabi, Sadia Ahmed, Veronika Kiryanova, Paul Fairie, Maria J Santana

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bishnu BajgainDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9504-9805
Sarah RabiDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Sadia AhmedAlberta SPOR SUPPORT Unit, Patient Engagement Team, Calgary, AB, Canada. sadahmed@ucalgary.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-8040-7198
Veronika KiryanovaPatient and Community Engagement Research, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Paul FairieDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Maria J SantanaDepartment of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0202-5952
University of Calgary · CACalgary Laboratory Services · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe onset of COVID-19 has caused an international upheaval of traditional in-person approaches to care delivery. Rapid system-level transitions to virtual care provision restrict the ability of healthcare professionals to evaluate care quality from the patient's perspective. This poses challenges to ensuring that patient-centered care is upheld within virtual environments. To address this, the study's objective was to review how virtual care has impacted patient experiences and outcomes during COVID-19, through the use of patient-reported experience and outcome measures (PREMs and PROMs), respectively.

methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines to evaluate patient responsiveness to virtual care during COVID-19. Using an exhaustive search strategy, relevant peer-reviewed articles published between January 2020 and 2022 were pulled from MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsychInfo databases. Study quality was independently assessed by two reviewers using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A patient partner was consulted throughout the study to provide feedback and co-conduct the review.

resultsAfter removing duplicates, 6048 articles underwent title and abstract review, from which 644 studies were included in the full-text review stage. Following this, 102 articles were included in the study. Studies were published in 20 different countries, were predominantly cross-sectional, and reported on the delivery of virtual care in specialized adult outpatient settings. This review identified 29 validated PREMs and 43 PROMs. Several advantages to virtual care were identified, with patients citing greater convenience, (such as saving travel time and cost, less waiting experienced to see care providers) and increased protection from viral spread. Some studies also reported challenges patients and caregivers faced with virtual care, including feeling rushed during the virtual care appointment, lack of physical contact or examination presenting barriers, difficulty with communicating symptoms, and technology issues.

conclusionThis review provides supportive evidence of virtual care experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic from patient and caregiver perspectives. This research provides a comprehensive overview of what patient-reported measures can be used to record virtual care quality amid and following the pandemic. Further research into healthcare professionals' perspectives would offer a supportive lens toward a strong person-centered healthcare system.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PersonnelHumansPandemicsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresCOVID-19Healthcare service utilizationPatient-centered carePatient experiencePatient-reported outcomesVirtual care delivery

Identifiers

PMID38038800
PMCPMC10692047
OpenAlexW4389223430

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.