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

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1111/jep.70071

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, Yangama Jokwiro, 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.

查看原文本刊更多论文

成人血液透析患者虚拟多学科团队会议模型的评价：一项定性研究

在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间，面对面的多学科团队会议演变为虚拟平台。卫生保健专业人员对虚拟多学科团队会议的经验尚不清楚，也不清楚虚拟会议在大流行后时代是否是一种可行的长期替代方案。目的探讨肾病多学科团队成员在虚拟会议管理方面的经验和看法。设计采用半结构化访谈。使用最大变异抽样来确保性别和职业角色的充分代表。所有访谈都被录音并逐字记录下来，然后由两位研究人员使用理论领域框架进行独立分析。然后，第三位研究人员被提交解决任何分歧。参与者肾脏病多学科小组会议的成员。测量卫生专业人员在虚拟多学科团队会议中的经验和观点。结果9名受访人员中，6名为女性，多数为护士。大多数参与者的年龄在30-40岁之间。在三个主要领域中出现了三个主题：对工作人员和患者结果的影响；有限的技术技能和改进的机会。从四个中间领域，又捕获了另外四个主题：职业责任；对参与度的影响；参与障碍；以及为患者提供最佳护理的愿望。结论：单一中心肾脏病护理团队的医疗保健专业人员报告说，虚拟多学科会议克服了地理障碍和感染控制限制，并提供了更广泛的包容性的可能性。然而，需要策略来克服技术问题，提高参与者驾驭技术的技能，并优化积极参与。

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

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 医学-卫生保健

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.