Virtual Cancer Care Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic : Patient and Staff Perspectives and Recommendations
PURPOSE: COVID-19 catalyzed rapid implementation of virtual cancer care (VC); however, work is needed to inform long-term adoption. We evaluated patient and staff experiences with VC at a large urban, tertiary cancer center to inform recommendations for postpandemic sustainment.
METHODS: All physicians who had provided VC during the pandemic and all patients who had a valid e-mail address on file and at least one visit to the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada, in the preceding year were invited to complete a survey. Interviews and focus groups with patients and staff across the cancer center were analyzed using qualitative descriptive analysis and triangulated with survey findings.
RESULTS: Response rates for patients and physicians were 15% (2,343 of 15,169) and 41% (100 of 246), respectively. A greater proportion of patients than physicians were satisfied with VC (80.1 v 53.4%; P < .01). In addition, fewer patients than physicians felt that virtual visits were worse than those conducted in person (28.0 v 43.4%; P < .01) and that telephone and video visits negatively affected the human interaction that they valued (59.8% v 82.0%; P < .01). Major barriers to VC for patients were respect for care preferences and personal boundaries, accessibility, and equitable access. For staff, major barriers included a lack of role clarity, dedicated resources (space and technology), integration of nursing and allied health, support (administrative, clinical, and technical), and guidance on appropriateness of use.
CONCLUSION: Patient and staff perceptions and barriers to virtual care are different. Moving forward, we need to pay attention to both staff and patient experiences with virtual care since this will have major implications for long-term adoption into clinical practice.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2024 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
JCO oncology practice - (2024) vom: 24. Jan., Seite OP2300254 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Abdelmutti, Nazek [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 24.01.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status Publisher |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1200/OP.23.00254 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM36756629X |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM36756629X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240125232202.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240125s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1200/OP.23.00254 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1270.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM36756629X | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38266201 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Abdelmutti, Nazek |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Virtual Cancer Care Beyond the COVID-19 Pandemic |b Patient and Staff Perspectives and Recommendations |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 24.01.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status Publisher | ||
| 520 | |a PURPOSE: COVID-19 catalyzed rapid implementation of virtual cancer care (VC); however, work is needed to inform long-term adoption. We evaluated patient and staff experiences with VC at a large urban, tertiary cancer center to inform recommendations for postpandemic sustainment | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: All physicians who had provided VC during the pandemic and all patients who had a valid e-mail address on file and at least one visit to the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada, in the preceding year were invited to complete a survey. Interviews and focus groups with patients and staff across the cancer center were analyzed using qualitative descriptive analysis and triangulated with survey findings | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Response rates for patients and physicians were 15% (2,343 of 15,169) and 41% (100 of 246), respectively. A greater proportion of patients than physicians were satisfied with VC (80.1 v 53.4%; P < .01). In addition, fewer patients than physicians felt that virtual visits were worse than those conducted in person (28.0 v 43.4%; P < .01) and that telephone and video visits negatively affected the human interaction that they valued (59.8% v 82.0%; P < .01). Major barriers to VC for patients were respect for care preferences and personal boundaries, accessibility, and equitable access. For staff, major barriers included a lack of role clarity, dedicated resources (space and technology), integration of nursing and allied health, support (administrative, clinical, and technical), and guidance on appropriateness of use | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Patient and staff perceptions and barriers to virtual care are different. Moving forward, we need to pay attention to both staff and patient experiences with virtual care since this will have major implications for long-term adoption into clinical practice | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Powis, Melanie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Macedo, Alyssa |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Liu, Zhihui |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Bender, Jackie L |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Papadakos, Janet |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hack, Saidah |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rajnish, Nikki |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rana, Palwasha |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kittuppanantharajah, Shay |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lovas, Mike |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Melwani, Sheena |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Moody, Lesley |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Elliot, Mary |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ashfaq, Iqra |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Avery, Lisa |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Mohammed, Hiba |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Berlin, Alejandro |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Krzyzanowska, Monika K |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t JCO oncology practice |d 2020 |g (2024) vom: 24. Jan., Seite OP2300254 |w (DE-627)NLM301053103 |x 2688-1535 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2024 |g day:24 |g month:01 |g pages:OP2300254 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1200/OP.23.00254 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2024 |b 24 |c 01 |h OP2300254 | ||