Cited by 16Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationTechnology Use by Older AdultsHealthcare Systems and Technology

Healthcare Professionals’ Experience of Performing Digital Care Visits—A Scoping Review

Open access
Lampickienė, Ieva, Davoody, Nadia·2022·Life

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The use of digital care visits has been increasing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Learning more about healthcare professionals’ technology experiences provides valuable insight and a basis for improving digital visits. This study aimed to explore the existing literature on healthcare professionals’ experience performing digital care visits. A scoping review was performed following Arksey & O’Malley’s proposed framework using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses. The collected data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. Five main themes were identified in the literature: positive experiences/benefits, facilitators, negative experiences/challenges, barriers, and suggestions for improvement. Healthcare professionals mostly reported having an overall positive experience with digital visits and discovered benefits for themselves and the patients. However, opinions were mixed or negative regarding the complexity of decision making, workload and workflow, suitability of this type of care, and other challenges. The suggestions for improvement included training and education, improvements within the system and tools, along with support for professionals. Despite overall positive experiences and benefits for both professionals and patients, clinicians reported challenges such as physical barriers, technical issues, suitability concerns, and others. Digital care visits could not fully replace face-to-face visits.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/life12060913

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lampickienė et al concluded that HCPs mostly report positive experiences with digital consultations, which have advantages for HCPs and patients.

    “Lampickienė et al [100] concluded that HCPs mostly report positive experiences with digital consultations, which have advantages for HCPs and patients.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [2]NCBI Videoconferencing—MeSH Available online: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/?term=videoconferencing (accessed on 11 March 2021)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lampickienė, I., & Davoody, N.
Affiliations
Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Corresponding author
Davoody, Nadia
Venue
Life
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-06-17
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
913
ISSN
2075-1729 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4283019671
Cited by
16
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6
FWCI
0.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Life (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Health Informatics Center at Karolinska Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
Keywords
telemedicine, health professionals' experiences, COVID-19 pandemic, clinician workload, workflow, technical challenges, face-to-face visits

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review