Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39631058›Full record

ArticleJournal of participatory medicine2024

Implementing a Patient Portal for the Remote Follow-Up of Self-Isolating Patients With COVID-19 Infection Through Patient and Stakeholder Engagement (the Opal-COVID Study): Mixed Methods Pilot Study.

Yuanchao Ma, David Lessard, Serge Vicente, Kim Engler, Adriana Rodriguez Cruz, Moustafa Laymouna, Opal-COVID Patient Expert Committee, Tarek Hijal, Lina Del Balso, Guillaume Thériault and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of participatory medicine, 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

22 authors.

Yuanchao MaCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4048-1705
David LessardCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1151-3763
Serge VicenteCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6478-4308
Kim EnglerCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8364-7421
Adriana Rodriguez CruzChronic Viral Illness Service, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0211-0073
Moustafa LaymounaCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0673-6356
Opal-COVID Patient Expert CommitteeSee Acknowledgments, .
Tarek HijalDepartment of Radiation Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9341-1735
Lina Del BalsoChronic Viral Illness Service, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8318-3620
Guillaume ThériaultChronic Viral Illness Service, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-9698-5120
Nathalie PaisibleChronic Viral Illness Service, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-4988-8464
Nadine KronfliCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2724-0496
Marie-Pascale PomeyResearch Centre of the University of Montreal Hospital Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5180-8139
Hansi PeirisCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-2634-0365
Sapha BarkatiInfectious Diseases and Immunity in Global Health Program, Research Institute of McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9388-855X
Marie-Josée BrouilletteCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3681-8798
Marina KleinCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3063-8430
Joseph CoxCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7041-1556
Alexandra de PokomandyCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6809-1357
Jamil AsselahDepartment of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6875-6512
Susan J BartlettCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9755-2490
Bertrand LebouchéCenter of Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1273-9393

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedent challenge to public health systems, with 95% of cases in Quebec sent home for self-isolation. To ensure continuous care, we implemented an intervention supported by a patient portal (Opal) to remotely monitor at-home patients with COVID-19 via daily self-reports of symptoms, vital signs, and mental health that were reviewed by health care professionals.

objectiveWe describe the intervention's implementation, focusing on the (1) process; (2) outcomes, including feasibility, fidelity, acceptability, usability, and perceived response burden; and (3) barriers and facilitators encountered by stakeholders.

methodsThe implementation followed a co-design approach operationalized through patient and stakeholder engagement. The intervention included a 14-day follow-up for each patient. In the mixed methods study at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, Quebec, participants completed questionnaires on implementation outcomes on days 1, 7, and 14. All scores were examined against predefined success thresholds. Linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations were used to assess changes in scores over time and whether they differed by sex, age, and race. Semistructured interviews were conducted with expert patients, health care professionals, and coordinators for the qualitative analysis and submitted to thematic analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

resultsIn total, 51 participants were enrolled between December 2020 and March 2021; 49 (96%) were included in the quantitative analysis. Observed recruitment and retention rates (51/52, 98% and 49/51, 96%) met the 75% feasibility success threshold. Over 80% of the participants found it "quite easy/very easy" to complete the daily self-report, with a completion rate (fidelity) of >75% and a nonsignificant decreasing trend over time (from 100%, 49/49 to 82%, 40/49; P=.21). Mean acceptability and usability scores at all time points exceeded the threshold of 4 out of 5. Acceptability scores increased significantly between at least 2 time points (days 1, 7, and 14: mean 4.06, SD 0.57; mean 4.26, SD 0.59; and mean 4.25, SD 0.57; P=.04). Participants aged >50 years reported significantly lower mean ease of use (usability) scores than younger participants (days 1, 7, and 14: mean 4.29, SD 0.91 vs mean 4.67, SD 0.45; mean 4.13, SD 0.89 vs mean 4.77, SD 0.35; and mean 4.24, SD 0.71 vs mean 4.72, SD 0.71; P=.004). In total, 28 stakeholders were interviewed between June and September 2021. Facilitators included a structured implementation process, a focus on stakeholders' recommendations, the adjustability of the intervention, and the team's emphasis on safety. However, Opal's thorough privacy protection measures and limited acute follow-up capacities were identified as barriers, along with implementation delays due to data security-related institutional barriers.

conclusionsThe intervention attained targets across all studied implementation outcomes. Qualitative findings highlighted the importance of stakeholder engagement. Telehealth tools have potential for the remote follow-up of acute health conditions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/35760.

Indexed as

appCanadacoronavirushealth information technologyimplementation scienceinfectious diseasemobile phonepatient portalremote monitoringSARS-CoV-2telehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID39631058
PMCPMC11656113

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.