Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38127430›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

Client and Clinician Experiences and Perspectives of Exercise Physiology Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Qualitative Study.

Riley C C Brown, Shelley E Keating, Patrick J Owen, Paul S Jansons, Jenna McVicar, Christopher D Askew, Kelly M Clanchy, Ralph Maddison, Andrew Maiorana, Suzanne M Robinson and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet 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
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Riley C C BrownSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4390-5980
Shelley E KeatingSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5357-2721
Patrick J OwenInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3924-9375
Paul S JansonsInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8766-0516
Jenna McVicarInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5007-7223
Christopher D AskewVasoActive Research Group, School of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8076-8789
Kelly M ClanchySchool of Health Sciences and Social Work, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9249-1801
Ralph MaddisonInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8564-5518
Andrew MaioranaAllied Health Department, Fiona Stanley Hospital, Perth, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0681-1707
Suzanne M RobinsonDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5703-6475
Niamh L MundellInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5406-3216
Deakin University · AUThe University of Queensland · AUCurtin University · AUGriffith University · AUUniversity of the Sunshine Coast · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic led to changes in the delivery of exercise physiology services. The lived experience of those who continued to provide or receive exercise physiology services during the heightened public health restrictions of the inaugural year of the COVID-19 pandemic has received little attention to date. Acquiring this knowledge will be fundamental in addressing whether telehealth is a viable option for service delivery in exercise care, research, and policy. This is especially pertinent in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent global interest in digital health delivery of health care services.

objectiveThis study aims to explore the clinician and client experiences and perspectives of exercise physiology services delivered in person or via telehealth during the inaugural year of the COVID-19 pandemic (after January 25, 2020; the date of the first confirmed case in Australia).

methodsEligible participants for this study were adult (aged 18 years or older; capable of understanding and writing in English) clients who received and clinicians who delivered 1 or more exercise physiology sessions in Australia during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic (June 2020 to June 2021). The data collection period spanned from January 20, 2021, to September 24, 2021. A total of 18 semistructured individual interviews were conducted with accredited exercise physiologists (n=7) and clients (n=11) who engaged with exercise physiology services during this period. All interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was conducted with themes and subthemes derived using deductive and inductive approaches.

resultsA total of 3 dominant themes, each with 2 subthemes, were identified. The first theme was that telehealth enables access to services but limits the use of some clinical tools. Remote access to services was valued by both clinicians and clients, but the exercise clinical environment could not be replicated over telehealth. This was especially true regarding access to exercise equipment. Second, engagement and the "relational space" are limited by telehealth. Perceived challenges regarding social interactions and a sense of community were a limitation for clients, and difficulties fostering clinician-client report were noted by clinicians. Finally, technological challenges are pervasive in the telehealth delivery of exercise services. Both clinicians and clients noted that systems necessary to facilitate telehealth frequently disrupted delivery, and client-based technical issues were influenced by digital health literacy.

conclusionsShared client and accredited exercise physiologist experiences highlight key considerations for the ongoing implementation of telehealth to facilitate the uptake and effectiveness of exercise physiology services. These findings imply that the co-design of solutions to client-perceived limitations of telehealth delivery is warranted.

Indexed as

COVID-19TelemedicineAdultDigital HealthHumansPandemicsQualitative ResearchcliniciancoronaviruseffectivenesseHealthengagementexerciseexercise physiologyimplementationinterviewqualitative studyrehabilitationtelehealthtelemedicinetool

Identifiers

PMID38127430
PMCPMC10767626
OpenAlexW4386972219

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.