Observational studyBMC health services research2025
Enhancing accessibility and equity in utilization of virtual care: Virtual Care @ Your Library pilot project.
Observational study in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe post-pandemic expansion of virtual care in Nova Scotia aimed to improve access for patients without primary care providers. Virtual Care Nova Scotia, launched in 2021, and increased access, but equitable reach remained a concern. The Virtual Care @ Your Library (VC@YL) initiative addressed this gap by offering virtual healthcare access through public libraries in collaboration with government and health organizations.
methodsThis descriptive observational study applied the RE-AIM framework. Reach was assessed by the number of participants. Effectiveness was evaluated through service utilization and satisfaction. Adoption examined staff burden and role integration. Implementation fidelity and access barriers were documented. Maintenance was assessed via cost analysis and potential savings from avoiding emergency department (ED) and walk-in clinic visits under different utilization and cost scenarios.
resultsVC@YL engaged 518 unique users across 1,073 visits. Most users were aged 65+ (64.2%), citing technological barriers (75.4%) and support needs (77.6%) as primary reasons for use. All users successfully completed virtual care appointments, with 98% reporting positive experiences. Among library staff, 83% felt well-supported, and 65% of patron interactions required less than 15 min. Digital literacy assistance was the most common service (75.4%). The total project cost for VC@YL was $93,061, incorporating both one-time implementation and recurring staff costs. The cost per VC@YL utilization was $87. Avoided ED visits resulted in net savings of up to $63,614, though higher virtual care costs reduced savings in certain scenarios. Walk-in clinic diversions yielded negative cost savings due to the cost structure. Total savings ranged from $15,708 to $61,541, with per-person savings from $30 to $57, depending on virtual care consultation costs and utilization levels.
conclusionsThe VC@YL initiative demonstrated how community-based programs can effectively enhance access to virtual care, particularly for individuals facing technological barriers. This pilot project showed strong potential for improving healthcare access through practical support and leveraging existing community infrastructure. Its scalability and cost-effectiveness make it a promising model for broader implementation in similar settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.