A Hybrid Virtual Fracture Clinic is Safe and Efficacious in the COVID-19 Era: Stay at Home and Save Lives

Sharma, Anirudh; Butt, Muhammad Imran; Ajayi, Bisola; Perkins, S. J.; Umarji, Shamim; Hing, Caroline; Lui, Darren F

doi:10.7759/cureus.14849

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A 2020 systematic review found that virtual clinics improved the provision of healthcare and reduced the transmission of the virus during the outbreak [10]. Studies found a mixed patient response to pandemic telehealth measures [11][12][13] but found robust evidence concerning safety in light of the pandemic [14][15][16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety Evaluation of an Expedited Omalizumab Home Self-Administration Pathway

Hussain¹,

Devlin²

2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety Evaluation of an Expedited Omalizumab Home Self-Administration Pathway

Hussain¹,

Devlin²

2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Recent work has also shown that patients and health-care practitioners find video consultations to be acceptable and provide a better platform for interaction, connectivity and communication than telephone consultations [55]. As the mode of delivery of health-care consultations has changed over the course of the pandemic and is currently more hybrid in manner, with patients reporting satisfaction with this type of service [56], tailoring PINCER related medication reviews to patient preference in terms of mode of delivery could help enhance intervention acceptability. As it has been identified that it is not always feasible or and can cause extra strain for health-care providers to offer different options for the mode of delivery [36], more work could be done to help determine how service provision could be tailored to accommodate this in a way that would not impose extra burden on patients or health-care practitioners.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding factors that could influence patient acceptability of the use of the PINCER intervention in primary care: A qualitative exploration using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Medication errors are an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The pharmacist-led IT-based intervention to reduce clinically important medication errors (PINCER) intervention was shown to reduce medication errors when tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial and when implemented across one region of England. Now that it has been rolled out nationally, and to enhance findings from evaluations with staff and stakeholders, this paper is the first to report patients’ perceived acceptability on the use of PINCER in primary care and proposes suggestions on how delivery of PINCER related care could be delivered in a way that is acceptable and not unnecessarily burdensome. Methods A total of 46 participants living with long-term health conditions who had experience of medication reviews and/or monitoring were recruited through patient participant groups and social media. Semi-structured, qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted face-to-face or via telephone. A thematic analysis was conducted and findings mapped to the constructs of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Results Two themes were identified and interpreted within the most relevant TFA construct: Perceptions on the purpose and components of PINCER (Affective Attitude and Intervention Coherence) and Perceived patient implications (Burden and Self-efficacy). Overall perceptions on PINCER were positive with participants showing good understanding of the components. Access to medication reviews, which PINCER related care can involve, was reported to be limited and a lack of consistency in practitioners delivering reviews was considered challenging, as was lack of communication between primary care and other health-care providers. Patients thought it would be helpful if medication reviews and prescription renewal times were synchronised. Remote medication review consultations were more convenient for some but viewed as a barrier to communication by others. It was acknowledged that some patients may be more resistant to change and more willing to accept changes initiated by general practitioners. Conclusions Participants found the concept of PINCER acceptable; however, acceptability could be improved if awareness on the role of primary care pharmacists is raised and patient-pharmacist relationships enhanced. Being transparent with communication and delivering streamlined and consistent but flexible PINCER related care is recommended.

show abstract

“…In the last 18 months, the incentive to reduce in-person review has changed from a desire to optimise outpatients service to one of patient safety. [23][24][25] The pandemic will undoubtably change orthopaedic outpatient services in the long term with the wider adoption, and expansion, of TTC review and direct discharge protocols.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%