Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39310089›Full record

ArticleNIHR open research2024

Evaluating video and hybrid group consultations in general practice: mixed-methods, participatory study protocol (TOGETHER 2).

Chrysanthi Papoutsi, Gary Abel, Cynthia Iglesias, Jackie van Dael, Claire Reidy, Stuart D Faulkner, Helene Raynsford, Michele Siciliano, Luis Beltran Galindo, Vijay Gc and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NIHR open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

13 authors.

Chrysanthi PapoutsiNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX26GG, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1189-7100
Gary AbelDepartment of Health and Community Science, Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, England, EX1 2LU, UK.
Cynthia IglesiasDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, York, England, YO10 5SQ, UK.
Jackie van DaelNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX26GG, UK.
Claire ReidyNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX26GG, UK.
Stuart D FaulknerNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX26GG, UK.
Helene RaynsfordIndependent public contributor, UK, UK.
Michele SicilianoDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, York, England, YO10 5SQ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7354-5368
Luis Beltran GalindoDepartment of Health Sciences, Seebohm Rowntree Building, University of York, York, England, YO10 5SQ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9199-8467
Vijay GcSchool of Human & Health Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, England, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0365-2605
John CampbellDepartment of Health and Community Science, Smeall Building, St Luke's Campus, University of Exeter, Exeter, England, EX1 2LU, UK.
Trisha GreenhalghNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX26GG, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2369-8088
Sara E ShawNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, England, OX26GG, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7014-4793

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: General practice is facing an unprecedented challenge in managing the consequences of the pandemic. In the midst of a policy drive to balance remote and in-person service provision, substantial workload pressures remain, together with increasing prevalence of long-term conditions, and declining staff numbers and morale. To address these challenges, some practices in the UK have been delivering video and hybrid group consultations (VHGCs) providing clinical care to multiple patients at the same time. Despite positive initial findings and enthusiasm, there are still gaps in our understanding of the influence VHGCs have on patient experience, healthcare utilisation, quality, safety, equity and affordability. Objectives: To generate an in-depth understanding of VHGCs for chronic conditions in general practice, surface assumptions and sociotechnical dynamics, inform practice and extend theorisation. Methods: Mixed-methods, multi-site research study using co-design and participatory methods, from qualitative, quantitative and cost-related perspectives. WP1 includes a national, cross-sectional survey on VHGC provision across the UK. In WP2 we will engage patients and general practice staff in co-design workshops to develop VHGC models with emphasis on digital inclusion and equity. In WP3 we will carry out a mixed-methods process evaluation in up to 10 GP practices across England (5 sites already running VHGCs and 5 comparison sites). Qualitative methods will include interviews, focus groups and ethnographic observation to examine the experiences of patients, carers, clinical and non-clinical NHS staff, commissioners and policy-makers. Quantitative methods will examine the impact of VHGCs on healthcare utilisation in primary and secondary care, patient satisfaction, engagement and activation. We will also assess value for money of group and individual care models from a health economics perspective. Conclusions: We aim to develop transferable learning on sociotechnical change in healthcare delivery, using VHGCs as an exemplar of technology-supported innovation. Findings will also inform the design of a future study.

Indexed as

general practicegroup consultinginvisible worklived experienceremote care

Identifiers

PMID39310089
PMCPMC11415752

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.