Willingness, perceived facilitators and barriers to use remote care among healthcare professionals – a cross-sectional study

• Published in: BMC health services research 2023-11, Vol.23 (1), p.1-1307, Article 1307
• Main Authors: Thomassen, Emil Eirik Kvernberg, Berg, Inger Jorid, Kristianslund, Eirik Klami, Tveter, Anne Therese, Østerås, Nina
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Age groups; Analysis; Clinical medicine; COVID-19; Cross-sectional studies; Data collection; Departments; Digital health; Disease; Employees; Facilitators and barriers; Healthcare professionals; Hospitals; Inflammatory joint Disease; Medical personnel; Medical research; Nurses; Occupations; Pandemics; Patients; Physicians; Professional ethics; Questionnaires; Remote care; Rheumatology
• ISSN: 1472-6963; 1472-6963
• DOI: 10.1186/s12913-023-10301-4

Background Remote care has the potential of improving access to timely care for people with inflammatory joint diseases (IJD), but there is limited knowledge on how this approach is regarded by healthcare professionals (HCP). This study aimed to examine willingness, perceived facilitators, and barriers to use remote care among HCP. Methods Employees at 20 rheumatology departments in Norway received a digital survey containing 16 statements regarding willingness, perceived facilitators and barriers to use remote care. Statements were scored using numeric rating scales (NRS, 0-10, 10 = strongly agree), and analysed in linear regression models. Open-ended responses with participant-defined facilitators and barriers were analysed using qualitative manifest analysis. Results A total of 130 participants from 17 departments completed the survey. The majority of participants were 45 years or older (n = 84, 54%), 54 (42%) were medical doctors, 48 (37%) nurses, and 27 (21%) were allied healthcare professionals, clinical leaders, or secretaries. A high willingness to use remote care was observed (median NRS: 9, IQR 8-10). The facilitator statement with the highest score was that patients save time and costs by using remote care, whereas the barrier statement with the highest score was the lack of physical examination. Willingness to use remote care was positively associated with the belief that patients wish to use it ([beta]: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.34), that patients in remission need less hospital visits ([beta]: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.16, 0.43), and if remote care is widely adopted by co-workers ([beta]: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.39). Willingness was negatively associated with mistrust in the technical aspects of remote care ([beta]: -0.26, 95% CI:-0.40, -0.11), and lack of physical examination ([beta]: -0.24, 95% CI: -0.43, -0.06). The open-ended responses showed that technological equipment, eligible patients, user-friendly software, adequate training and work flow could be facilitators, but also that lack of these factors were considered barriers to use remote care. Conclusion This study showed that HCP have a high willingness to use remote care, and provides important new knowledge on perceived facilitators and barriers among HCP relevant for implementation of remote care for eligible patients with IJD. Keywords: Remote care, Rheumatology, Inflammatory joint Disease, Healthcare professionals, Facilitators and barriers, Digital health