Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38569716›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2024

Quality measures of virtual care in ambulatory healthcare environments: a scoping review.

Samuel Petrie, Celia Laur, Patricia Rios, Ally Suarez, Oluwatoni Makanjuola, Emeralda Burke, Onil Bhattacharyya, Geetha Mukerji

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Samuel Petrie *Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6809-6027
Celia Laur *Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4555-1407
Patricia RiosWomen's College Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Ally SuarezWomen's College Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Oluwatoni MakanjuolaWomen's College Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Emeralda BurkeWomen's College Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Onil BhattacharyyaWomen's College Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Geetha MukerjiWomen's College Institute for Health Systems Solutions and Virtual Care, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada Geetha.Mukerji@wchospital.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-6477-9848

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDelivery of virtual care increased throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and persisted after physical distancing measures ended. However, little is known about how to measure the quality of virtual care, as current measures focus on in-person care and may not apply to a virtual context. This scoping review aims to understand the connections between virtual care modalities used with ambulatory patient populations and quality measures across the Quintuple Aim (provider experience, patient experience, per capita cost, population health and health equity).

designVirtual care was considered any interaction between patients and/or their circle of care occurring remotely using any form of information technology. Five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library, JBI) and grey literature sources (11 websites, 3 search engines) were searched from 2015 to June 2021 and again in August 2022 for publications that analysed virtual care in ambulatory settings. Indicators were extracted, double-coded into the Quintuple Aim framework; patient and provider experience indicators were further categorised based on the National Academy of Medicine quality framework (safety, effectiveness, patient-centredness, timeliness, efficiency and equity). Sustainability was added to capture the potential for continued use of virtual care.

results13 504 citations were double-screened resulting in 631 full-text articles, 66 of which were included. Common modalities included video or audio visits (n=43), remote monitoring (n=11) and mobile applications (n=11). The most common quality indicators were related to patient experience (n=58 articles), followed by provider experience (n=25 articles), population health outcomes (n=23 articles) and health system costs (n=19 articles).

conclusionsThe connections between virtual care modalities and quality domains identified here can inform clinicians, administrators and other decision-makers how to monitor the quality of virtual care and provide insights into gaps in current quality measures. The next steps include the development of a balanced scorecard of virtual care quality indicators for ambulatory settings to inform quality improvement.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareCOVID-19SARS-CoV-2TelemedicineHumansPandemicsQuality Indicators, Health CareQuality of Health CareHealth EquityPatient-Centered CareQuality in health careTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID38569716
PMCPMC10989112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.