Cargando…
Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a shift in healthcare towards telehealth delivery, which presents challenges for exercise physiology services. We aimed to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the reach, efficacy, adoption and implementation of telehealth delivery for exercis...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306237/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35867168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-022-00483-2 |
_version_ | 1784752501936881664 |
---|---|
author | Owen, Patrick J. Keating, Shelley E. Askew, Christopher D. Clanchy, Kelly M. Jansons, Paul Maddison, Ralph Maiorana, Andrew McVicar, Jenna Robinson, Suzanne Mundell, Niamh L. |
author_facet | Owen, Patrick J. Keating, Shelley E. Askew, Christopher D. Clanchy, Kelly M. Jansons, Paul Maddison, Ralph Maiorana, Andrew McVicar, Jenna Robinson, Suzanne Mundell, Niamh L. |
author_sort | Owen, Patrick J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a shift in healthcare towards telehealth delivery, which presents challenges for exercise physiology services. We aimed to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the reach, efficacy, adoption and implementation of telehealth delivery for exercise physiology services by comparing Australian practises before (prior to 25 January 2020) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (after 25 January 2020). METHODS: This retrospective audit included 80 accredited exercise physiology clinicians. We examined relevant dimensions of the RE-AIM framework (reach, effectiveness, adoption and implementation) from the clinician perspective. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, 91% (n = 73/80) of surveyed clinicians offered telehealth delivery service, compared to 25% (n = 20/80) prior. Mean (SD) telehealth delivery per week doubled from 5 (7) to 10 (8) hours. In-person delivery decreased from 23 (11) to 15 (11) hours per week. Typical reasons for not offering telehealth delivery were client physical/cognitive incapacity (n = 33/80, 41%) and safety (n = 24/80, 30%). Clinician-reported reasons for typical clients not adopting telehealth delivery were personal preference (n = 57/71, 80%), physical capacity (n = 35/71, 49%) and access to reliable delivery platforms (n = 27/71, 38%). Zoom (n = 54/71, 76%) and telephone (n = 53/71, 75%) were the most commonly used platforms. Of the reasons contributing to incomplete treatment, lack of confidence in delivery mode was sevenfold higher for telehealth compared to in-person delivery. No serious treatment-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth delivery of exercise physiology services increased and in-person delivery decreased, which suggests the profession was adaptable and agile. However, further research determining comparative efficacy and cost-effectiveness is warranted. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40798-022-00483-2. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9306237 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93062372022-07-24 Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit Owen, Patrick J. Keating, Shelley E. Askew, Christopher D. Clanchy, Kelly M. Jansons, Paul Maddison, Ralph Maiorana, Andrew McVicar, Jenna Robinson, Suzanne Mundell, Niamh L. Sports Med Open Original Research Article INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a shift in healthcare towards telehealth delivery, which presents challenges for exercise physiology services. We aimed to examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the reach, efficacy, adoption and implementation of telehealth delivery for exercise physiology services by comparing Australian practises before (prior to 25 January 2020) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (after 25 January 2020). METHODS: This retrospective audit included 80 accredited exercise physiology clinicians. We examined relevant dimensions of the RE-AIM framework (reach, effectiveness, adoption and implementation) from the clinician perspective. RESULTS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, 91% (n = 73/80) of surveyed clinicians offered telehealth delivery service, compared to 25% (n = 20/80) prior. Mean (SD) telehealth delivery per week doubled from 5 (7) to 10 (8) hours. In-person delivery decreased from 23 (11) to 15 (11) hours per week. Typical reasons for not offering telehealth delivery were client physical/cognitive incapacity (n = 33/80, 41%) and safety (n = 24/80, 30%). Clinician-reported reasons for typical clients not adopting telehealth delivery were personal preference (n = 57/71, 80%), physical capacity (n = 35/71, 49%) and access to reliable delivery platforms (n = 27/71, 38%). Zoom (n = 54/71, 76%) and telephone (n = 53/71, 75%) were the most commonly used platforms. Of the reasons contributing to incomplete treatment, lack of confidence in delivery mode was sevenfold higher for telehealth compared to in-person delivery. No serious treatment-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth delivery of exercise physiology services increased and in-person delivery decreased, which suggests the profession was adaptable and agile. However, further research determining comparative efficacy and cost-effectiveness is warranted. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40798-022-00483-2. Springer International Publishing 2022-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9306237/ /pubmed/35867168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-022-00483-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Owen, Patrick J. Keating, Shelley E. Askew, Christopher D. Clanchy, Kelly M. Jansons, Paul Maddison, Ralph Maiorana, Andrew McVicar, Jenna Robinson, Suzanne Mundell, Niamh L. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit |
title | Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit |
title_full | Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit |
title_fullStr | Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit |
title_full_unstemmed | Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit |
title_short | Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Exercise Physiology Services in Australia: A Retrospective Audit |
title_sort | impact of the covid-19 pandemic on exercise physiology services in australia: a retrospective audit |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9306237/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35867168 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40798-022-00483-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT owenpatrickj impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT keatingshelleye impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT askewchristopherd impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT clanchykellym impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT jansonspaul impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT maddisonralph impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT maioranaandrew impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT mcvicarjenna impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT robinsonsuzanne impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit AT mundellniamhl impactofthecovid19pandemiconexercisephysiologyservicesinaustraliaaretrospectiveaudit |