BackgroundVideo mediated meetings with patients were introduced in outpatient care at a hospital in Sweden. New behaviours and tasks emerged due to changes of roles, work processes and responsibilities. The study investigates effects of digital transformation, in this case how video visits in outpatient care change work processes and introduces new tasks, in order to further improve the concept of video visits.ObjectiveThrough real-time, social interactional features of preparing for and conducting video visits, the study examines clinicians’ perceived limitations and disturbances, and how the conditions between patients and clinicians may change when using video visits instead of face-to-face meetings in outpatient care.MethodsQualitative methods have been used including 14 observations of video visits at two different clinics and 14 followup interviews with clinicians. Transcriptions of interviews and field notes were thematically analysed, discussed and synthesised into themes.ResultsDisturbances and limitations related to the technology were related to time; a flexibility to schedule the meeting unbound of place, frustrations when the other part was late for the scheduled meeting, and that more experienced users of video visits usually waited longer before logging in. They were also related to sound; problems getting the sound to work satisfactory during the video visits, and problems with the image. Disturbances and limitations related to the surroundings were related to both the patient’s and the clinician’s environment; the principle of video technology in itself may affect the experience and the content of the consultation, and the surrounding chosen changes the conditions for and reduces the participants’ field of view.ConclusionsWe could see 1) a transformation of roles and responsibilities when turning from face-to-face meetings to video visits, 2) that video visits add new circumstances, with a risk of introducing disturbances and limitations, that in turn affects the content of the meeting, 3) that avoiding negative disturbances during a video visit, requires a sensibility from the clinician’s side as well as a trust in the patient’s judgement, 4) that both expected and unexpected disturbances and limitations during a video visit affect the clinician’s behaviour, feelings, the content of the meeting and how the clinician’s relate to the different components of the concept, and 5) that there is a change of roles introduced when conducting video visits, eg, the clinician taking the first line support if both (s)he and the patient encounter problems with the technology.

Background Mental illnesses are increasing in the population; consequently, the number of psychiatric emergencies handled by the emergency medical services (EMS) has also increased. Alternative response systems have been developed and evaluated, but there is still a lack of knowledge concerning the patients' experiences of being cared for in the EMS by a psychiatric emergency response unit (In Swedish: Psykiatrisk Akut Mobilitet [PAM]). Objective The aim of this study was to explore patients' experiences of the caring encounter with the PAM team. Design A qualitative study design with 14 patients' interviews and content analysis was used. Results The patients expressed that the PAM team created a safe environment and actively involved the patient in their care by creating an open and safe place for dialogue. In this safe environment, the patients described how they participated in the decision making and received care without fear of being dismissed, ignored or judged. Discussion and Conclusion The patients' experiences of being cared for by the PAM team show that person‐centred care was achieved by involving the patients in their own care. This participation was possible because mutual trust and confidence existed, and the patients acknowledged the specialist response unit to be a valuable part of the EMS. However, further studies are needed to explore whether the PAM as a response unit in the EMS decreases the risk of suicide and to examine different health economic aspects of using PAM in the EMS.

BackgroundVideo visits with patients were introduced into outpatient care at a hospital in Sweden. New behaviors and tasks emerged due to changes in roles, work processes, and responsibilities. This study investigates the effects of the digital transformation—in this case, how video visits in outpatient care change work processes and introduce new tasks—to further improve the concept of video visits. The overarching goal was to increase the value of these visits, with a focus on the value of conducting the treatment for the patient.ObjectiveThrough the real-time, social interactional features of preparing for and conducting video visits with patients with obesity, this study examines which patients the clinicians considered suitable for video visits and why. The aim was to identify the criteria used by clinicians when selecting patients for video visits to understand what criteria the clinicians used as the grounds for their selection.MethodsQualitative methods were used, including 13 observations of video visits at 2 different clinics and 14 follow-up interviews with clinicians. Transcripts of interviews and field notes were thematically analyzed, discussed, and synthesized into themes.ResultsFrom the interviews, 20 different arguments for selecting a specific patient for video visits were identified. Analyzing interviews and field notes also revealed unexpressed arguments that played a part in the selection process. The unexpressed arguments, as well as the implicit reasons, for why a patient was given the option of video visits can be understood as the selection criteria for helping clinicians in their decision about whether to offer video visits or not. The criteria identified in the collected data were divided into 3 themes: practicalities, patient ability, and meeting content.ConclusionsNot all patients with obesity undergoing treatment programs should be offered video visits. Patients’ new responsibilities could influence the content of the meeting and the progress of the treatment program. The selection criteria developed and used by the clinicians could be a tool for finding a balance between what the patient wants and what the clinician thinks the patient can manage and achieving good results in the treatment program. The criteria could also reduce the number and severity of disturbances and limitations during the meeting and could be used to communicate the requirements they represent to the patient. Some of the criteria are based on facts, whereas others are subjective. A method for how and when to involve the patient in the selection process is recommended as it may strengthen the patient’s sense of responsibility and the relationship with the clinician.

AbstractBackgroundPain is one of the most common symptoms treated in emergency department (ED). Pain may cause suffering and disability for the patient. Inadequate pain management may be associated with increased risk of complications such as sleep disturbance, delirium and depression. Previous studies conclude that pain management in ED is insufficient and inadequate. Yet, little is known about patients’ own experience regarding pain management in ED.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to explore the satisfaction of pain management in patients having acute musculoskeletal injuries before and after implementation of mandatory documentation regarding pain assessment in the ED.MethodAn observational pre-post intervention study design was used. The study was conducted on patients having acute musculoskeletal injuries such as soft tissue injury, back pain or wrist/arm/leg/foot fractures in a 24-h adult (>15 years) ED at a public urban teaching hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. Data was collected by an interview based on a questionnaire.ResultsA total of 160 patients answered the questionnaire. In the pre- (n = 80) and post-intervention (n = 80) groups, 91/95% experienced pain in the ED. A significant difference (p < 0.003) was found during the post-intervention period, with more patients receiving analgesics compared to the pre-intervention group. A significant decline (p < 0.03) in patients’ own reported pain intensity at discharge was found between the groups. Patients’ reported satisfaction on pain management in the ED increased in the post-intervention group, but the difference was not statistically significantly.ConclusionPatients’ satisfaction with pain management increased, but not statistically significantly. However, both percentages of patients receiving analgesic drugs increased and pain intensity decrease at discharge were statistically significant after the intervention that made nurses obliged to register pain.Implication According to the findings of this study, mandatory pain documentation facilitates pain management in the ED, but there is still room for improvement. Additional actions are needed to improve patients’ satisfaction on pain management in the ED. Mandatory pain documentation in combination with person-centred care could be a way of improving patients’ satisfaction on pain management. Effective pain management is an important quality measure, and should be focused on in acute care in the ED. By routinely asking patients to report the pain intensity at discharge, the ED personnel can have direct feedback about the factual pain management. RNs may also be encouraged to use intravenous analgesics in higher extent when the patients have very severe pain.