Health and social care students in a faculty in the United Kingdom learn together in an interprofessional module through online discussion boards. The module assessment encourages engagement with technology and with group members through peer review. An evaluation of student experience of the module gathered data from 48 students participating in 10 online groups. Analysis of contributions to discussion boards, and transcripts of interviews with 20 students revealed differing levels of participation between individuals and groups. Many students were apprehensive about the technology and there were different views about the advantages and disadvantages of online learning. Students interacted in a supportive manner. Group leadership was seen as associated with maintaining motivation to complete work on time. Students reported benefiting from the peer review process but were uncomfortable with critiquing each other's work. Sensitivity about group process may have inhibited the level of critical debate. Nevertheless the module brought together students from different professions and different sites. Examples of sharing professional knowledge demonstrated successful interprofessional collaboration online.

We sought (a) an inductive understanding of patient and clinician perspectives and experiences of the communication of diagnostic test information and (b) a normative understanding of the management of uncertainty that occurs during the clinical encounter in emergency care. Between 2016 and 2018, 58 interviews were conducted with patients and nursing, medical, and managerial staff. Interview data were sequentially analyzed through an inductive thematic analysis, then a normative theory of uncertainty management. Themes of “Ideals,” “Service Efficiency,” and “Managing Uncertainty” were inductively identified as influencing the communication of diagnostic test information. A normative theory of uncertainty management highlighted (a) how these themes reflected the interaction’s sociocultural context, encapsulated various criteria by which clinicians and patients evaluated the appropriateness and effectiveness of their communication, and represented competing goals during the clinical encounter, and (b) how systemic tensions between themes accounted for when diagnostic test information communication occurred, was deferred or avoided.

BackgroundThere has been a precipitous rise telehealth use in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding differences between face-to-face and telehealth consulting is an important component for planning the future use of telehealth services beyond the pandemic. However, there is limited evidence on whether telehealth consulting impacts medication prescribing under pandemic circumstances.AimTo compare medication prescribing in face-to-face versus telehealth consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australian general practice.Design and SettingThis multisite, retrospective observational study used de-identified routinely collected electronic health data extracted from 806 general practices in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW), Australia between April-December 2020.MethodThe primary outcome measure was whether at least one medication was prescribed following a telehealth or face-to-face consultation. Data are reported by medication and for each of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) Classification System level one groups. The secondary outcome measure was first-time prescribing. Telehealth included both telephone and video consultations.ResultsA total of 13,608,216 consultations satisfied the inclusion criteria (61% face-to-face and 39% telehealth). Most telehealth consultations were conducted via telephone (97.8%). Overall, 39.3% of face-to-face and 33.0% of telehealth consultations prescribed at least one medication– a statistically significant difference (adjusted OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.379–1.381). The prescribing rate was greater for face-to-face vs telehealth consultations for all drug groups except ATC level 1N (nervous system).ConclusionUnder COVID-19 restrictions in the states of Victoria and NSW, Australia, medication prescribing was higher in face-to-face consultations when compared to telehealth consultations in the study population.

ObjectivesTelehealth has emerged as a viable and safe mode of care delivery in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, electronic general practice data reveal differences in uptake and consultation mode, which we hypothesise may be due to potential barriers impacting on quality of care. We aimed to identify the benefits and barriers of telehealth use in general practice, using an ‘Action Research’ approach involving general practitioners (GPs) and general practice stakeholders.DesignQualitative focus group performed within a broader Action Research methodology.SettingA focus group was held in August 2021, with general practice participants from Victoria, Australia.ParticipantsThe study consisted of a purposive sample of 11 participants, including GPs (n=4), representatives from three primary health networks (n=4) and data custodian representatives (n=3) who were part of a project stakeholder group guided by an Action Research approach.MethodsSemistructured interview questions were used to guide focus group discussions via videoconference, which were recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. The transcript was analysed using an inductive thematic approach.ResultsEmerging themes included evolution of telehealth, barriers to telehealth (privacy, eligibility, technology, quality of care, sociodemographic and residential aged care barriers) and benefits of telehealth (practice, quality of care, sociodemographic and residential aged care benefits).ConclusionThe findings highlight a range of barriers to telehealth that impact general practice, but also provide justification for the continuation and development of telehealth. These results provide important context to support data-driven population-based findings on telehealth uptake. They also highlight areas of quality improvement for the enhancement of telehealth as a valuable tool for routine general practice patient care.

Objective To investigate the impact of health information technology (IT) systems on clinicians’ work practices and patient engagement in the management and follow-up of test results. Materials and Methods A search for studies reporting health IT systems and clinician test results management was conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, and Scopus from January 1999 to June 2018. Test results follow-up was defined as provider follow-up of results for tests that were sent to the laboratory and radiology services for processing or analysis. Results There are some findings from controlled studies showing that health IT can improve the proportion of tests followed-up (15 percentage point change) and increase physician awareness of test results that require action (24–28 percentage point change). Taken as whole, however, the evidence of the impact of health IT on test result management and follow-up is not strong. Discussion The development of safe and effective test results management IT systems should pivot on several axes. These axes include 1) patient-centerd engagement (involving shared, timely, and meaningful information); 2) diagnostic processes (that involve the integration of multiple people and different clinical settings across the health care spectrum); and 3) organizational communications (the myriad of multi- transactional processes requiring feedback, iteration, and confirmation) that contribute to the patient care process. Conclusion Existing evidence indicates that health IT in and of itself does not (and most likely cannot) provide a complete solution to issues related to test results management and follow-up.

IntroductionThe failure to follow-up pathology and medical imaging test results poses patient-safety risks which threaten the effectiveness, quality and safety of patient care. The objective of this project is to: (1) improve the effectiveness and safety of test-result management through the establishment of clear governance processes of communication, responsibility and accountability; (2) harness health information technology (IT) to inform and monitor test-result management; (3) enhance the contribution of consumers to the establishment of safe and effective test-result management systems.Methods and analysisThis convergent mixed-methods project triangulates three multistage studies at seven adult hospitals and one paediatric hospital in Australia.Study 1 adopts qualitative research approaches including semistructured interviews, focus groups and ethnographic observations to gain a better understanding of test-result communication and management practices in hospitals, and to identify patient-safety risks which require quality-improvement interventions.Study 2 analyses linked sets of routinely collected healthcare data to examine critical test-result thresholds and test-result notification processes. A controlled before-and-after study across three emergency departments will measure the impact of interventions (including the use of IT) developed to improve the safety and quality of test-result communication and management processes.Study 3 adopts a consumer-driven approach, including semistructured interviews, and the convening of consumer-reference groups and community forums. The qualitative data will identify mechanisms to enhance the role of consumers in test-management governance processes, and inform the direction of the research and the interpretation of findings.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted by the South Eastern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee and Macquarie University. Findings will be disseminated in academic, industry and consumer journals, newsletters and conferences.

This is one of very few evaluations to describe the reaction of student dietitians to IPE. Student dietitians had largely positive reactions to the IPE course. Further research is required to evaluate whether these positive reactions were a direct consequence of the inclusion of students from other health professions and whether these translate into positive effects on learning, behaviour and results. The opportunities for the dietetic profession posed by students' involvement in IPE are discussed.

Interdisciplinary group work, as a method of learning, has become an essential component of most interprofessional undergraduate curricula in health and social care. Research into the effectiveness of these groups has concentrated on the dynamics of interaction between students from the different professions and focused largely on stereotyping and power. However, within small groups, social and psychological pressures are likely to influence participants’ behaviours and have a dramatic impact on overall effectiveness. Using qualitative data from an evaluative research study of a pre‐qualifying interprofessional undergraduate curriculum, the experience of students engaged in face‐to‐face group learning was examined. Data were collected from 15 groups of health and social care students across two sites of a university in the UK. Age, gender, experience and the demographic composition of the group affected individuals’ levels of participation. Analysis of group observations, student interviews and focus groups revealed a range of influences on group interaction. These include participation, group roles, tasks and cohesion and a tendency to avoid conflict.