Managing the absent clinical eye in calls to an oncological emergency telephone – a focus group study

Abstract

Managing the absent clinical eye in calls to an oncological emergency telephonea focus group study Background: Telephone consultations are common in supporting patients and caregivers in managing symptoms from cancer diseases and side effects from cancer treatment. In connection with telephone consultations, it may be a challenge that healthcare professionals have to rely on their auditory sense alone when they assess whether the problem can be solved over the telephone, or whether patients need an examination face to face. Objective: To explore how healthcare professionals identify patients' essential concerns and assess serious conditions in calls to an oncological emergency telephone without face-to-face contact. Methods: From a phenomenological-hermeneutical frame of reference, the analysis of three focus groups with a total of 16 healthcare professionals was guided by content analysis. Ethics: The study follows the ethical guidelines for research. Results: Two themes emerged. To identify patients in serious conditions, healthcare professionals kept focus on: (1) 'Reaching a mutual understanding without the clinical eye'. Before making a decision regarding a face-toface examination, the healthcare providers were as follows: (2) 'Listening to an inner voiceattention on clues and signs'. Limitations: The transferability of the findings is limited to healthcare professionals who perform telephone-mediated care in a team of nurses and physicians. Conclusion: Staying open for diverse perspectives and integrating nonanalytical as well as analytical illness scripts, healthcare professionals were able to identify patients that needed further examination face to face.

Hospital nurses’ experiences of assessing health status changes in stem‐cell transplanted patients in home care: A qualitative study

“…The physical distance in remote assessment compromises the richness and complexity of eye contact, facial expressions and body language, which provide clues that could change the meaning of verbal expressions, consequently making it difficult for nurses to detect signs of patient deterioration. This aligns with already existing knowledge about missing out on clinical information when only addressing the patients over the telephone (Barbosa & Silva, 2017; Pedersen et al, 2021).…”

Nursing care during COVID-19 at non-COVID-19 hospital units: A qualitative study

“…As a result of the demands of social distancing, the number of telephone calls increased, which affected the ability to see the patient's face and their non-verbal expressions. According to Pedersen et al, 40 this may harm the quality of nursing care because RNs feel limited by only using their auditory sense and not what they call the ‘clinical eye’, which they normally use to deduce patients’ situations. Our findings therefore suggest that the RNs’ usual understanding of what characterises good nursing has been challenged by the pervasive influence of COVID-19 and, consequently, that RNs must redefine how they can provide high-quality nursing care.…”

Providing Telephone-Based Support for Patients With Haematological Malignancies: A Qualitative Investigation of Expert Nurses

“…In this study, nurses highlighted clinical situations where support could be delivered without compromise included palliative care, similar to findings by Steindal et al., (2020) describing a genuine relationship providing reassurance through telehealth in palliative home care. Telephone consultations imply limited evaluation and the need for intuition in the absence of full physical assessment (Pedersen et al., 2020), and results from this study suggest the absence of visual assessment and cues restricted necessary comprehensive evaluation in complex situations. Recent literature suggests that both patients and healthcare providers report satisfaction in relation to the use of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic (Andrews et al., 2020; Dalby et al., 2021), however satisfaction may depend on what is feasible rather than that which is preferable.…”