Quality assurance of remote clinical assessments in the NHS

Patient safety in remote primary care encounters: multimethod qualitative study combining Safety I and Safety II analysis

BACKGROUND

Triage and clinical consultations increasingly occur remotely. We aimed to learn why safety incidents occur in remote encounters and how to prevent them.

SETTING AND SAMPLE

UK primary care. 95 safety incidents (complaints, settled indemnity claims and reports) involving remote interactions. Separately, 12 general practices followed 2021-2023.

METHODS

Multimethod qualitative study. We explored causes of real safety incidents retrospectively ('Safety I' analysis). In a prospective longitudinal study, we used interviews and ethnographic observation to produce individual, organisational and system-level explanations for why safety and near-miss incidents (rarely) occurred and why they did not occur more often ('Safety II' analysis). Data were analysed thematically. An interpretive synthesis of why safety incidents occur, and why they do not occur more often, was refined following member checking with safety experts and lived experience experts.

RESULTS

Safety incidents were characterised by inappropriate modality, poor rapport building, inadequate information gathering, limited clinical assessment, inappropriate pathway (eg, wrong algorithm) and inadequate attention to social circumstances. These resulted in missed, inaccurate or delayed diagnoses, underestimation of severity or urgency, delayed referral, incorrect or delayed treatment, poor safety netting and inadequate follow-up. Patients with complex pre-existing conditions, cardiac or abdominal emergencies, vague or generalised symptoms, safeguarding issues, failure to respond to previous treatment or difficulty communicating seemed especially vulnerable. General practices were facing resource constraints, understaffing and high demand. Triage and care pathways were complex, hard to navigate and involved multiple staff. In this context, patient safety often depended on individual staff taking initiative, speaking up or personalising solutions.

CONCLUSION

While safety incidents are extremely rare in remote primary care, deaths and serious harms have resulted. We offer suggestions for patient, staff and system-level mitigations.

Remote Consultations in General Practice - A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Remote consultations in general practice can be very useful form of telemedicine, which is basically a way to exchange medical information to improve the clinical health of patients when the patient and their general practitioner (GP) are not on the same place at the same time. This concept was developed in the 1980s to provide health care to patients who lived in remote areas.

METHODS

We were interested in researching what kind of remote consultations are available in general practice and what is the usage of these methods. We used four keywords - remote consultation and general practice or family medicine or primary care - and we searched in four different scientific databases: Medline-PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and IEEX Xplore.

RESULTS

We used a PRISMA diagram to identify studies and search the four main databases, we investigated 48 full text articles and when we applied our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies were included in this systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review covers the topics of remote consultation versus a traditional or classic physical consultation. Studies have shown its importance prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and its value while in the mist of the pandemic then caring for infected patients. We have found that remote consultation is necessary, but it must be an improvement on the previous system. Teleconsultations can reduce the number of visits, especially during lockdown situations, with both patients and GPs satisfied with the method, but we should not forget that a physical consultation cannot be fully replaced by a remote consultation due to the limitations of the latter.