Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGreenhalgh, T
dc.contributor.authorRosen, R
dc.contributor.authorShaw, SE
dc.contributor.authorByng, R
dc.contributor.authorFaulkner, S
dc.contributor.authorFinlay, T
dc.contributor.authorGrundy, E
dc.contributor.authorHusain, L
dc.contributor.authorHughes, G
dc.contributor.authorLeone, C
dc.contributor.authorMoore, L
dc.contributor.authorPapoutsi, C
dc.contributor.authorPope, C
dc.contributor.authorRybczynska-Bunt, S
dc.contributor.authorRushforth, A
dc.contributor.authorWherton, J
dc.contributor.authorWieringa, S
dc.contributor.authorWood, GW
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-30T12:56:10Z
dc.date.issued2021-08-13
dc.identifier.issn2673-253X
dc.identifier.issn2673-253X
dc.identifier.other726095
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18428
dc.description.abstract

<jats:p>Establishing and running remote consultation services is challenging politically (interest groups may gain or lose), organizationally (remote consulting requires implementation work and new roles and workflows), economically (costs and benefits are unevenly distributed across the system), technically (excellent care needs dependable links and high-quality audio and images), relationally (interpersonal interactions are altered), and clinically (patients are unique, some examinations require contact, and clinicians have deeply-held habits, dispositions and norms). Many of these challenges have an under-examined ethical dimension. In this paper, we present a novel framework, Planning and Evaluating Remote Consultation Services (PERCS), built from a literature review and ongoing research. PERCS has 7 domains—the reason for consulting, the patient, the clinical relationship, the home and family, technologies, staff, the healthcare organization, and the wider system—and considers how these domains interact and evolve over time as a complex system. It focuses attention on the organization's digital maturity and digital inclusion efforts. We have found that both during and beyond the pandemic, policymakers envisaged an efficient, safe and accessible remote consultation service delivered through state-of-the art digital technologies and implemented via rational allocation criteria and quality standards. In contrast, our empirical data reveal that strategic decisions about establishing remote consultation services, allocation decisions for appointment type (phone, video, e-, face-to-face), and clinical decisions when consulting remotely are fraught with contradictions and tensions—for example, between demand management and patient choice—leading to both large- and small-scale ethical dilemmas for managers, support staff, and clinicians. These dilemmas cannot be resolved by standard operating procedures or algorithms. Rather, they must be managed by attending to here-and-now practicalities and emergent narratives, drawing on guiding principles applied with contextual judgement. We complement the PERCS framework with a set of principles for informing its application in practice, including education of professionals and patients.</jats:p>

dc.format.extent726095-
dc.format.mediumElectronic-eCollection
dc.languageeng
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherFrontiers Media
dc.subjectremote consultations
dc.subjectvideo consultations
dc.subjectevaluation
dc.subjecttelephone consultations
dc.subjectE-consultations
dc.subjectPERCS framework
dc.subjectcomplexity
dc.titlePlanning and Evaluating Remote Consultation Services: A New Conceptual Framework Incorporating Complexity and Practical Ethics
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeArticle
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34713199
plymouth.volume3
plymouth.publication-statusPublished online
plymouth.journalFrontiers in Digital Health
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fdgth.2021.726095
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/FoH - Community and Primary Care
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CCT&PS
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Plymouth Institute of Health and Care Research (PIHR)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeSwitzerland
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-07-19
dc.rights.embargodate2021-12-1
dc.identifier.eissn2673-253X
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.3389/fdgth.2021.726095
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2021-08-13
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV