To explore if consumer interest in digital health products (DHPs), changed following the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown measures that ensued.
Retrospective time-series analysis of web-based internet searches for DHPs in the UK, split over two periods, pre-COVID-19 lockdown (January 2019–23 March 2020) and post-COVID-19 lockdown (24 March 2020–31 December 2020).
Members of the UK general population using health-app libraries provided by the Organisation for the Review of Care and Health Applications.
The primary outcome was volume of searches for DHPs. Secondary outcomes considered search volumes for 25 different therapeutic areas. Outcomes were assessed for significance using a two-stage Poisson test.
There were 126 640 searches for DHPs over the study period. Searches for DHPs increased by 343% from 2446 per month prior to COVID-19 lockdown measures being introduced to 8996 per month in the period following the first COVID-19 lockdown in the UK. In total, 23/25 (92%) of condition areas experienced a significant increase in searches for DHPs, with the greatest increases occurring in the first 2 months following lockdown. Musculoskeletal conditions (2,036%), allergy (1,253%) and healthy living DHPs (1,051%) experienced the greatest increases in searches compared with pre-lockdown. Increased search volumes for DHPs were sustained in the 9 months following the introduction of lockdown measures, with 21/25 (84%) of condition areas experiencing monthly search volumes at least 50% greater than pre-lockdown levels.
The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly disrupted the routine delivery of healthcare, making face-to-face interaction difficult, and contributing to unmet clinical needs. This study has demonstrated significant increases in internet searches for DHPs by members of the UK population since COVID-19, signifying an increased interest in this potential therapeutic medium. Future research should clarify whether this increased interest has resulted in increased acceptance and utilisation of these technologies also.
Early phase cancer clinical trials have become increasingly complicated in terms of patient selection and trial procedures—this is reflected in the increasing length of participant information sheets (PIS). Informed consent for early phase clinical trials has been contentious due to the potential ethical issues associated with performing experimental research on a terminally ill population which has exhausted standard treatment options. Empirical studies have demonstrated significant gaps in patient understanding regarding the nature and intent of these trials. This study aims to test whether enhanced informed consent for patient education can improve patient scores on a validated questionnaire testing clinical trial comprehension.
This is a randomised controlled trial that will allocate patients who are eligible to participate in one of four investigator-initiated clinical trials at the Royal Marsden Drug Development Unit to either a standard arm or an experimental arm, stratified by age and educational level. The standard arm will involve the full length trial PIS, followed by electronic or paper administration of the Quality of Informed Consent Questionnaire Parts A and B (QuIC-A and QuIC-B). The experimental arm will involve the full length trial PIS, exposure to a two-page study aid and 10 online educational videos, followed by administration of the QuIC-A and QuIC-B. The primary endpoint will be the difference (using a one-sided two-sample t-test) in the QuIC-A score, which measures objective understanding, between the standard and experimental arm. Accrual target is at least 17 patients per arm to detect an 8 point difference (80% power, alpha 0.05).
Ethics approval was granted by the National Health Service Health Research Authority on 15 June 2020—IRAS Project ID 277065, Protocol Number CCR5165, REC Reference 20/EE/0155. Results will be disseminated via publication in a relevant journal.
The aim was to analyse the psychometric properties of a patient-reported-experience measure, the Patient Enablement and Satisfaction Survey (PESS), when used to evaluate the care provided by Advanced Nurse Practitioners (ANPs) in terms of factor structure and internal consistency. The PESS is a 20-item, patient-completed data collection tool that was originally developed to measure patient experience and enablement following consultation with nurses in general practice.
Cross-sectional survey; validity and reliability analysis.
The sample in this study consisted of 178 patients who consulted with 26 ANPs working in four different specialities. Data were collected between June and December 2019. An exploratory factor analysis of the PESS was conducted to determine convergent validity which was supported by parallel analysis and the traditional Kaiser criterion. The internal consistency of individual PESS items was determined via Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, the Average Variance Extracted tests and item-subscale/total score correlations.
A three-factor structure (PESS-ANP) was found through exploratory factor analysis and this was supported by parallel analysis, the traditional Kaiser criterion and the percentage of variance explained criterion. A high degree of internal consistency was reported across all factors. One question was omitted from the analysis (‘Overall Satisfaction’) following the identification of problematic cross-loadings. The three factor solution was identified as: patient satisfaction, quality of care provision and patient enablement.
The findings of this study propose a three-factor model that is sufficiently reliable for analysing the experience and enablement of patients following consultation with an ANP.
Increasingly, patient-reported experience measures are being used to evaluate patients’ experience of receiving care from a healthcare professional. The PESS was identified to be reliable in evaluating the experience of patients who receive care from an ANP while a three-factor structure was proposed that can capture specific attributes of this care.
To identify, appraise and summarise the available evidence relating to community nurses’ attitudes, knowledge and educational needs in relation to urinary continence.
Community nurses play a pivotal role in identifying and supporting individuals who experience urinary continence issues. Gaps in nurses’ continence-related education and knowledge may contribute to sub-optimal assessment and management across the continuum of care.
A systematic review.
MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete and EMBASE were searched from inception to November 2020; keywords used included community nurses, urinary continence, incontinence, knowledge, attitude and education needs. Given the degree of heterogeneity between included studies, a meta-analysis was not feasible. Included studies were critically evaluated; key study characteristics and findings pertinent to the review purpose were summarised. The review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 checklist.
Four studies reported in six papers were included. Community nurses lacked knowledge in certain areas of urinary continence and incontinence. Nurses reported they were adequately prepared but without sufficient knowledge to effectively care for those with urinary incontinence. Community nurses’ attitudes to urinary incontinence were generally positive, but they demonstrated misconceptions that urinary incontinence was inevitable and less distressing for older people.
There is limited research exploring community nurses’ knowledge, attitudes and education needs in relation to urinary continence and incontinence care. Community nurses may have knowledge gaps and less favourable attitudes to some aspects of urinary continence care.