39
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implementing online consultations in primary care: a mixed-method evaluation extending normalisation process theory through service co-production

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          To examine patient and staff views, experiences and acceptability of a UK primary care online consultation system and ask how the system and its implementation may be improved.

          Design

          Mixed-method evaluation of a primary care e-consultation system.

          Setting

          Primary care practices in South West England.

          Methods

          Qualitative interviews with 23 practice staff in six practices. Patient survey data for 756 e-consultations from 36 practices, with free-text survey comments from 512 patients, were analysed thematically. Anonymised patients’ records were abstracted for 485 e-consultations from eight practices, including consultation types and outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse quantitative data. Analysis of implementation and the usage of the e-consultation system were informed by: (1) normalisation process theory, (2) a framework that illustrates how e-consultations were co-produced and (3) patients’ and staff touchpoints.

          Results

          We found different expectations between patients and staff on how to use e-consultations ‘appropriately’. While some patients used the system to try and save time for themselves and their general practitioners (GPs), some used e-consultations when they could not get a timely face-to-face appointment. Most e-consultations resulted in either follow-on phone (32%) or face-to-face appointments (38%) and GPs felt that this duplicated their workload. Patient satisfaction of the system was high, but a minority were dissatisfied with practice communication about their e-consultation.

          Conclusions

          Where both patients and staff interact with technology, it is in effect ‘co-implemented’. How patients used e-consultations impacted on practice staff’s experiences and appraisal of the system. Overall, the e-consultation system studied could improve access for some patients, but in its current form, it was not perceived by practices as creating sufficient efficiencies to warrant financial investment. We illustrate how this e-consultation system and its implementation can be improved, through mapping the co-production of e-consultations through touchpoints.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Beyond Adoption: A New Framework for Theorizing and Evaluating Nonadoption, Abandonment, and Challenges to the Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability of Health and Care Technologies

            Background Many promising technological innovations in health and social care are characterized by nonadoption or abandonment by individuals or by failed attempts to scale up locally, spread distantly, or sustain the innovation long term at the organization or system level. Objective Our objective was to produce an evidence-based, theory-informed, and pragmatic framework to help predict and evaluate the success of a technology-supported health or social care program. Methods The study had 2 parallel components: (1) secondary research (hermeneutic systematic review) to identify key domains, and (2) empirical case studies of technology implementation to explore, test, and refine these domains. We studied 6 technology-supported programs—video outpatient consultations, global positioning system tracking for cognitive impairment, pendant alarm services, remote biomarker monitoring for heart failure, care organizing software, and integrated case management via data sharing—using longitudinal ethnography and action research for up to 3 years across more than 20 organizations. Data were collected at micro level (individual technology users), meso level (organizational processes and systems), and macro level (national policy and wider context). Analysis and synthesis was aided by sociotechnically informed theories of individual, organizational, and system change. The draft framework was shared with colleagues who were introducing or evaluating other technology-supported health or care programs and refined in response to feedback. Results The literature review identified 28 previous technology implementation frameworks, of which 14 had taken a dynamic systems approach (including 2 integrative reviews of previous work). Our empirical dataset consisted of over 400 hours of ethnographic observation, 165 semistructured interviews, and 200 documents. The final nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework included questions in 7 domains: the condition or illness, the technology, the value proposition, the adopter system (comprising professional staff, patient, and lay caregivers), the organization(s), the wider (institutional and societal) context, and the interaction and mutual adaptation between all these domains over time. Our empirical case studies raised a variety of challenges across all 7 domains, each classified as simple (straightforward, predictable, few components), complicated (multiple interacting components or issues), or complex (dynamic, unpredictable, not easily disaggregated into constituent components). Programs characterized by complicatedness proved difficult but not impossible to implement. Those characterized by complexity in multiple NASSS domains rarely, if ever, became mainstreamed. The framework showed promise when applied (both prospectively and retrospectively) to other programs. Conclusions Subject to further empirical testing, NASSS could be applied across a range of technological innovations in health and social care. It has several potential uses: (1) to inform the design of a new technology; (2) to identify technological solutions that (perhaps despite policy or industry enthusiasm) have a limited chance of achieving large-scale, sustained adoption; (3) to plan the implementation, scale-up, or rollout of a technology program; and (4) to explain and learn from program failures.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Implementing, Embedding, and Integrating Practices: An Outline of Normalization Process Theory

              C. May, T Finch (2009)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2018
                19 March 2018
                : 8
                : 3
                : e019966
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentPopulation Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School , University of Bristol , Bristol, UK
                [2 ] departmentNational Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (NIHR CLAHRC) West , University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust , Bristol, UK
                [3 ] OneCare (BNSSG) Ltd , Bristol, UK
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Michelle Farr; m.farr@ 123456bristol.ac.uk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1885-4771
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4378-3960
                Article
                bmjopen-2017-019966
                10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019966
                5875620
                29555817
                d23dae20-9a99-4227-8455-a674418bea38
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                : 09 October 2017
                : 12 December 2017
                : 16 January 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health Research;
                Funded by: One Care Consortium Ltd;
                Categories
                General practice / Family practice
                Research
                1506
                1696
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                co-production,telemedicine,primary care,normalisation process theory,online consultations,touchpoints

                Comments

                Comment on this article