IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0296768.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“Technology has allowed us to do a lot more but it’s not necessarily the panacea for everybody”: Family physician perspectives on virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond

Author

Listed:
  • Lindsay Hedden
  • Sarah Spencer
  • Maria Mathews
  • Emily Gard Marshall
  • Julia Lukewich
  • Shabnam Asghari
  • Paul Gill
  • Rita K McCracken
  • Crystal Vaughan
  • Eric Wong
  • Richard Buote
  • Leslie Meredith
  • Lauren Moritz
  • Dana Ryan
  • Gordon Schacter

Abstract

Introduction: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, Canadian primary care practices rapidly adapted to provide care virtually. Most family physicians lacked prior training or expertise with virtual care. In the absence of formal guidance, they made individual decisions about in-person versus remote care based on clinical judgement, their longitudinal relationships with patients, and personal risk assessments. Our objective was to explore Canadian family physicians’ perspectives on the strengths and limitations of virtual care implementation for their patient populations during the COVID-19 pandemic and implications for the integration of virtual care into broader primary care practice. Methods: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with family physicians working in four Canadian jurisdictions (Vancouver Coastal health region, British Columbia; Southwestern Ontario; the province of Nova Scotia; and Eastern Health region, Newfoundland and Labrador). We analyzed interview data using a structured applied thematic approach. Results: We interviewed 68 family physicians and identified four distinct themes during our analysis related to experiences with and perspectives on virtual care: (1) changes in access to primary care; (2) quality and efficacy of care provided virtually; (3) patient and provider comfort with virtual modalities; and (4) necessary supports for virtual care moving forward. Conclusions: The move to virtual care enhanced access to care for select patients and was helpful for family physicians to better manage their panels. However, virtual care also created access challenges for some patients (e.g., people who are underhoused or living in areas without good phone or internet access) and for some types of care (e.g., care that required access to medical devices). Family physicians are optimistic about the ongoing integration of virtual care into broader primary care delivery, but guidance, regulations, and infrastructure investments are needed to ensure equitable access and to maximize quality of care.

Suggested Citation

  • Lindsay Hedden & Sarah Spencer & Maria Mathews & Emily Gard Marshall & Julia Lukewich & Shabnam Asghari & Paul Gill & Rita K McCracken & Crystal Vaughan & Eric Wong & Richard Buote & Leslie Meredith &, 2024. "“Technology has allowed us to do a lot more but it’s not necessarily the panacea for everybody”: Family physician perspectives on virtual care during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(2), pages 1-16, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0296768
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0296768
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0296768&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0296768?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Weiss & Håvard T Rydland & Emil Øversveen & Magnus Rom Jensen & Solvor Solhaug & Steinar Krokstad, 2018. "Innovative technologies and social inequalities in health: A scoping review of the literature," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maria Gabriella Melchiorre & Giovanni Lamura & Francesco Barbabella & on behalf of ICARE4EU Consortium, 2018. "eHealth for people with multimorbidity: Results from the ICARE4EU project and insights from the “10 e’s” by Gunther Eysenbach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-26, November.
    2. Ann S Lauterbach & Tobias Tober & Florian Kunze & Marius R Busemeyer, 2023. "Can welfare states buffer technostress? Income and technostress in the context of various OECD countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(12), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Puckett, Cassidy & Wong, Jenise C. & Daley, Tanicia C. & Cossen, Kristina, 2020. "How organizations shape medical technology allocation: Insulin pumps and pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    4. Rydland, Håvard T., 2020. "Monitoring the social gradient: Inequalities in use of blood pressure monitors in the HUNT study," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Poulin, Laura I.L. & Skinner, Mark W. & Fox, Mary T., 2023. "Bed flow priorities and the spatial and temporal dimensions of rural older adult care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 336(C).
    6. Badr, Janine & Motulsky, Aude & Denis, Jean-Louis, 2024. "Digital health technologies and inequalities: A scoping review of potential impacts and policy recommendations," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    7. Hassane Alami & Pascale Lehoux & Sara E. Shaw & Chrysanthi Papoutsi & Sarah Rybczynska-Bunt & Jean-Paul Fortin, 2022. "Virtual Care and the Inverse Care Law: Implications for Policy, Practice, Research, Public and Patients," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-16, August.
    8. Meghan A Novisky & Kathryn M Nowotny & Dylan B Jackson & Alexander Testa & Michael G Vaughn, 2021. "Incarceration as a Fundamental Social Cause of Health Inequalities: Jails, Prisons and Vulnerability to COVID-19 [‘Flattening the Curve for Incarcerated Populations—Covid-19 in Jails and Prisons’]," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 61(6), pages 1630-1646.
    9. Oluwafemi P Owodunni & Elliott R Haut & Dauryne L Shaffer & Deborah B Hobson & Jiangxia Wang & Gayane Yenokyan & Peggy S Kraus & Jonathan K Aboagye & Katherine L Florecki & Kristen L W Webster & Chris, 2020. "Using electronic health record system triggers to target delivery of a patient-centered intervention to improve venous thromboembolism prevention for hospitalized patients: Is there a differential eff," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0296768. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.