Hybrid Care Modifications in the Delivery of Nonpandemic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Scoping Review

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had an unprecedented impact on the delivery of health care, with digital interventions accelerating more than ever before. However, evidence of how hybrid care models, combining digital health interventions with in-person care, were implemented during the pandemic remains scattered. Understanding hybrid care models is imperative to build resilient health systems that can ensure access to care during crisis situations. Objective: The study aimed to examine the implementation of hybrid care modifications to support the delivery of nonpandemic health care services in Europe during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed or MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycINFO on May 22, 2024, and updated on January 14, 2026. Studies were eligible if they included primary data on the use of digital care modifications implemented or scaled up during the COVID-19 pandemic for the delivery of nonpandemic health care services in Europe. Non–peer-reviewed publications and studies with a primary focus on mental health or pediatric care were excluded. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Descriptions of digital care modifications were inductively analyzed and used to create digital flows, combining telehealth systems, digital interventions, and care functions. Digital care modifications were categorized according to their hybrid care implementation (digital-only or hybrid). Study evaluations were extracted using the Kirkpatrick model. Results: A total of 189 studies were included for analysis. Studies covered evidence from 2020 to 2024, a total of 23 countries, and 37 health care disciplines. Hybrid care implementation was reported in over 60% (115/189) of the studies, describing various forms of digital and in-person care. Care modifications incorporating in-person and digital care components were more commonly described in specialty care contexts. A total of 68 distinct digital flows were identified, with a limited number of telehealth systems allowing substantial variety in both interventions and care functions. Prominent digital flows included the use of online platforms to support video and messaging for follow-up care. Over half of the studies did not describe any kind of evaluation. Conclusions: This review has shown how few telehealth systems were able to support a variety of care functions in the delivery of nonpandemic care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, underscoring their practical versatility. Integrating digital health as part of hybrid care models is essential in designing care pathways that can adapt to different contexts, including future health crises. Although a comprehensive search was conducted, the heterogeneous reporting of care modifications may have influenced the interpretation of the findings. In the future, research may expand the application of hybrid care models to innovative strategies for effective crisis management.