Telecare management of pain and mood symptoms: Adherence, utility, and patient satisfaction

Abstract

Introduction Pain, depression, and anxiety are prominent symptoms that frequently co-occur, causing significant debilitation and frequent primary care visits. This paper examines the acceptability of telecare and self-management modules in managing these conditions in a randomized trial. Methods The Comprehensive Management of Mood and Physical Symptoms (CAMMPS) trial compared an automated symptom management (ASM) plus self-management intervention with a comprehensive symptom management (CSM) intervention that added telecare facilitation of enhanced services. Data from the CAMMPS trial were analysed to compare the acceptability of these two interventions as indicated by utilization and patient satisfaction surveys. Results The mean number of automated reports completed was similar between the CSM and ASM groups (14.5 vs 14.0). Responses designated with clinically relevant “red alerts” (i.e. patient reports warranting an expedited nurse contact) were more frequent in the CSM group (10.2 vs 8.3). The CSM and ASM groups completed a similar number of the nine self-management modules (6.3 vs 5.8). The mean helpfulness score across all modules was higher in the CSM group than in the ASM group (1.8 vs 1.5; p = .003). The most common feedback suggestion from the ASM group was to have more personal interaction, while participants from both groups commonly suggested technical improvements or requests for more flexible timing of calls. Discussion Participants generally found both interventions satisfactory, with a trend in satisfaction data suggesting that patients tended to find the CSM intervention more helpful.

Outcomes of telemedicine care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Experience from an intervention program designed for vulnerable population in Brazil

“…8 The satisfaction assessment for validating innovative health models is an important tool for monitoring their implementation strategies and special attention should be given when such strategies focus on populations in vulnerable situations. 20 Several tools are described to assess satisfaction [21][22][23][24][25][26] but their performance in vulnerable populations can be challenging due to the less adherence and possible difficulty in understanding complex questionnaires. According to Mair et al, few studies had a population larger than 100 patients, most of those studies identified that telehealth was an acceptable consultation model due to the increased access to specialized services and the lower need for travel and time involved to realize the consultation.…”

COVID‐19 lockdown disrupts support networks integral to maintaining foot health: a mixed‐methods study

“…There is possibly an unmet need relating to facilitation of person centred care that has not been well supported during lockdown. Whilst physical interventions may be restricted, learning from other disciplines and application to virtual foot health consultation could provide useful facilitation of supported selfmanagement [18,25].…”

Telemedicine co‐design and value co‐creation in public health care

“…Telemedicine has, on occasion, been framed as a ‘mechanization’ of medicine and medical practice in extant studies, which have cited patients’ desire for more human interaction (Bushey et al., 2020) and user friendliness (Hadwich et al., 2010). However, these insights are not mirrored in the shared experiences of physicians on Twitter.…”