Evaluation of the Virtual Multidisciplinary Team Meeting Model for Adult Patients on Haemodialysis: A Qualitative Study

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Qiumian Wang, Yangama Jokwiro, Edward Zimbudzi
{"title":"Evaluation of the Virtual Multidisciplinary Team Meeting Model for Adult Patients on Haemodialysis: A Qualitative Study","authors":"Qiumian Wang,&nbsp;Yangama Jokwiro,&nbsp;Edward Zimbudzi","doi":"10.1111/jep.70071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>During the COVID-19 pandemic, face-to-face multidisciplinary team meetings evolved to virtual platforms. Healthcare professionals' experiences of virtual multidisciplinary team meetings is unknown, and it is not clear whether virtual meetings are a feasible long-term alternative in the post pandemic era.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To explore the experiences and perceptions of members of the multidisciplinary team managing people with kidney disease regarding virtual meetings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Maximal variation sampling was used to ensure adequate representation by gender and professional roles. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim, before being analysed by two researchers independently using the Theoretical Domains Framework. A third researcher was then referred to for resolving any disagreements.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Participants</h3>\n \n <p>Members of the nephrology multidisciplinary team meeting.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Measurements</h3>\n \n <p>Health professionals' experiences and perspectives of virtual multidisciplinary team meetings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of the nine participants interviewed, six were females and the majority were nurses. Most of the participants were aged 30–40 years. Three main themes emerged within the three primary domains: impact on staff and patient outcomes; limited technological skills, and opportunities for improvement. From the four intermediate domains, another four themes were captured: professional responsibility; impact on engagement; barriers to participation; and desire to provide optimal patient care.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Healthcare professionals of a single centre nephrology care team reported that virtual multidisciplinary meetings overcame geographic barriers and infection control restrictions, and offered possibilities for broader inclusivity. However, strategies are needed to overcome technological issues, improve participants' skills to navigate technology, and optimize active participation.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jep.70071","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70071","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, face-to-face multidisciplinary team meetings evolved to virtual platforms. Healthcare professionals' experiences of virtual multidisciplinary team meetings is unknown, and it is not clear whether virtual meetings are a feasible long-term alternative in the post pandemic era.

Objective

To explore the experiences and perceptions of members of the multidisciplinary team managing people with kidney disease regarding virtual meetings.

Design

Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Maximal variation sampling was used to ensure adequate representation by gender and professional roles. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim, before being analysed by two researchers independently using the Theoretical Domains Framework. A third researcher was then referred to for resolving any disagreements.

Participants

Members of the nephrology multidisciplinary team meeting.

Measurements

Health professionals' experiences and perspectives of virtual multidisciplinary team meetings.

Results

Of the nine participants interviewed, six were females and the majority were nurses. Most of the participants were aged 30–40 years. Three main themes emerged within the three primary domains: impact on staff and patient outcomes; limited technological skills, and opportunities for improvement. From the four intermediate domains, another four themes were captured: professional responsibility; impact on engagement; barriers to participation; and desire to provide optimal patient care.

Conclusions

Healthcare professionals of a single centre nephrology care team reported that virtual multidisciplinary meetings overcame geographic barriers and infection control restrictions, and offered possibilities for broader inclusivity. However, strategies are needed to overcome technological issues, improve participants' skills to navigate technology, and optimize active participation.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
143
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.
×
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