Introduction COVID-19 has necessitated greater adoption of virtual care (eg, telephone (audio), videoconference) delivery models. Virtual care provides opportunities for innovative practice in care planning with older persons and meaningful family engagement by synchronously involving multiple care providers. Nevertheless, there remains a paucity of summarising evidence regarding virtual team-based care planning for older persons. The purpose of this scoping review is to summarise evidence on the utilisation of virtual team-based care planning for older persons in formal care settings. Specifically, (1) what has been reported in the literature on the impact or outcomes of virtual team-based care planning? (2) What are the facilitators and barriers to implementation?
Methods and analysis This scoping review will follow a rigorous and well-established methodology by the Joanna Briggs Institute, supplemented by the Arksey & O’Malley and Levac, Colquhoun, & O’Brien frameworks. A three-step search strategy will be used to conduct a search on virtual team-based care planning for older persons in formal care settings. Keywords and index terms will be identified from an initial search in PubMed and AgeLine, and used to conduct the full search in the databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, AgeLine, PsycInfo and Scopus. Reference lists of included articles and grey literature retrieved through Google and Google Scholar will also be reviewed. Three researchers will screen titles and abstracts, and will conduct full-text review for inclusion. Extracted data will be mapped in a table.
Ethics and dissemination Research ethics approval is not required for data collection from publicly accessible information. Findings will be presented at conferences, submitted for open-access publication in a peer-reviewed journal and made accessible to multiple stakeholders. The scoping review will summarise the literature on virtual team-based care planning for the purpose of informing the implementation of a virtual PIECES™ intervention (Physical/Intellectual/Emotional health, Capabilities, Environment, and Social).
- geriatric medicine
- quality in healthcare
- information technology
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Twitter @harrisongao_, @MarieLeeYous, @nurselillian, @AnnaGarnett6
Contributors HG and M-LY drafted and developed the protocol manuscript. DC, LH, MEH and AG critically reviewed the protocol manuscript, helped refine research questions and provided guidance for the scoping review objective and methods. HG, M-LY, DC, LH, AG, MEH, NS and SS made meaningful contributions to the conceptualisation, design and development of the study protocol through regular team meetings and collaborated on manuscript editing and revisions. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Funding The LTC+: Acting on Pandemic Learning Together funding competition (#: SL5-174744) was managed and administered by Healthcare Excellence Canada, in partnership with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research’s Institute of Health Services and Policy Research (IHSPR), Institute of Aging (IA), Institute of Gender and Health (IGH), Institute of Infection and Immunity (III), Institute of Circulatory and Respiratory Health (ICRH), Institute of Population and Public Health (IPPH), Institute of Musculoskeletal Health and Arthritis (IMHA), the Saskatchewan Health Research Foundation (SHRF), the New Brunswick Health Research Foundation (NBHRF), the Centre for Aging + Brain Health Innovation (CABHI), powered by Baycrest, and the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research (MSFHR).
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.