Patient and carer perceptions of video, telephone and in-person clinics for Phenylketonuria (PKU).

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Hannah McBride, Sharon Evans, Alex Pinto, Anne Daly, Catherine Ashmore, Fatma Ilgaz, Suzanne Ford, Sharon Buckley, Anita MacDonald
{"title":"Patient and carer perceptions of video, telephone and in-person clinics for Phenylketonuria (PKU).","authors":"Hannah McBride, Sharon Evans, Alex Pinto, Anne Daly, Catherine Ashmore, Fatma Ilgaz, Suzanne Ford, Sharon Buckley, Anita MacDonald","doi":"10.1186/s13023-024-03295-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In phenylketonuria (PKU), attending multidisciplinary clinic reviews is an important aspect of life-long care. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, video and telephone clinics are used as alternative methods for people with PKU to have contact with their care team. There is limited research concerning patient preference, experience and perceptions of alternative types of clinic review. Individuals from the UK with PKU and their caregivers were invited to complete an online questionnaire, hosted on the National Society for PKU (NSPKU) website and social media platform.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data was available from 203 respondents. Forty one per cent of respondents (n = 49/119) preferred in-person clinics; 41% (n = 49) a hybrid of in-person, video and telephone clinics; 9% (n = 11) video clinics only, 6% (n = 7) telephone only and 3% (n = 3) were unsure. The main respondent obstacles to in-person clinics were costs, travel and time, but this was balanced by the benefits of a physical examination and better patient engagement/motivation. Twenty one per cent (n = 36/169) of respondents were uncomfortable with the number of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in a clinic room. Patients were less likely to consult with a doctor on video (64%, n = 91/143) or phone (50%, n = 59/119) reviews compared to in-person (80%, n = 146/183). Issues with video and telephone reviews included the shorter time length of review, distractions, technical issues and poor patient engagement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Online video and telephone clinic platforms were effective in overcoming the challenging circumstances in management, monitoring and treatment of patients with PKU during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, in-person clinics remain the preferred respondent option. It is important that HCPs are flexible, enabling people with PKU a choice of clinic options according to their individual clinical need and circumstances.</p>","PeriodicalId":19651,"journal":{"name":"Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11337755/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-024-03295-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In phenylketonuria (PKU), attending multidisciplinary clinic reviews is an important aspect of life-long care. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, video and telephone clinics are used as alternative methods for people with PKU to have contact with their care team. There is limited research concerning patient preference, experience and perceptions of alternative types of clinic review. Individuals from the UK with PKU and their caregivers were invited to complete an online questionnaire, hosted on the National Society for PKU (NSPKU) website and social media platform.

Results: Data was available from 203 respondents. Forty one per cent of respondents (n = 49/119) preferred in-person clinics; 41% (n = 49) a hybrid of in-person, video and telephone clinics; 9% (n = 11) video clinics only, 6% (n = 7) telephone only and 3% (n = 3) were unsure. The main respondent obstacles to in-person clinics were costs, travel and time, but this was balanced by the benefits of a physical examination and better patient engagement/motivation. Twenty one per cent (n = 36/169) of respondents were uncomfortable with the number of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in a clinic room. Patients were less likely to consult with a doctor on video (64%, n = 91/143) or phone (50%, n = 59/119) reviews compared to in-person (80%, n = 146/183). Issues with video and telephone reviews included the shorter time length of review, distractions, technical issues and poor patient engagement.

Conclusions: Online video and telephone clinic platforms were effective in overcoming the challenging circumstances in management, monitoring and treatment of patients with PKU during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, in-person clinics remain the preferred respondent option. It is important that HCPs are flexible, enabling people with PKU a choice of clinic options according to their individual clinical need and circumstances.

患者和照护者对苯丙酮尿症(PKU)视频、电话和面对面门诊的看法。
背景:对于苯丙酮尿症(PKU)患者来说,参加多学科门诊复查是终身护理的一个重要方面。自 COVID-19 大流行以来,视频和电话门诊被用作 PKU 患者与护理团队联系的替代方法。有关患者对其他门诊复查方式的偏好、体验和看法的研究十分有限。我们邀请英国的北京大学患者及其护理人员填写一份在线调查问卷,该问卷由全国北京大学协会(NSPKU)网站和社交媒体平台提供:203名受访者提供了数据。41%的受访者(n = 49/119)倾向于亲自前往诊所;41%的受访者(n = 49)倾向于亲自前往、视频和电话诊所相结合;9%的受访者(n = 11)只选择视频诊所,6%的受访者(n = 7)只选择电话诊所,3%的受访者(n = 3)表示不确定。受访者对面对面门诊的主要障碍是费用、交通和时间,但身体检查的好处和更好的患者参与/积极性平衡了这一点。21%的受访者(n=36/169)对诊室中医护人员(HCPs)的数量感到不舒服。患者通过视频(64%,n = 91/143)或电话(50%,n = 59/119)复查咨询医生的比例低于亲自复查(80%,n = 146/183)。视频和电话复查的问题包括复查时间较短、注意力分散、技术问题和患者参与度低:在线视频和电话门诊平台能有效克服 COVID-19 大流行期间 PKU 患者管理、监测和治疗方面的挑战性环境。然而,面对面门诊仍是首选的应答方式。重要的是,医疗保健人员要具有灵活性,让 PKU 患者能够根据个人临床需求和情况选择不同的门诊方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.10%
发文量
418
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that encompasses all aspects of rare diseases and orphan drugs. The journal publishes high-quality reviews on specific rare diseases. In addition, the journal may consider articles on clinical trial outcome reports, either positive or negative, and articles on public health issues in the field of rare diseases and orphan drugs. The journal does not accept case reports.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信