Outpatient Check-In Using an Online Portal

Background

Despite ongoing digital and technological developments, incorporation of new developments in outpatient care tends to be slow. Regarding an increasing demand for outpatient care, digitalization of health care carries the potential of a much needed more efficient and patient-oriented system.

Objective

To optimize classic face-to-face outpatient clinic follow-up consultations and evaluate the added value of an upfront digital consult preparation (DCP).

Methods

A cross-sectional observational study was conducted at Rijnstate Hospital (Arnhem, the Netherlands) among all consecutive patients, 18 years or older, who visited the Cardiology (in June 2021) or Neurology (in September 2021) outpatient clinic. All received a DCP survey before their scheduled outpatient clinic appointment, containing three questions regarding their upcoming visit. In addition, the involved health care providers were approached by using a questionnaire to share their experience regarding the DCP. Data concerning the experience of patients and health care providers was anonymous and gathered using Qualtrics.com.

Results

All 25 involved health care providers (12 cardiologists, 13 neurologists) provided feedback. According to the health care providers DCP decreased the workload and improved theirs and patients' preparation. In total, 785 of 1626 (48.3%) patients filled-in the DCP before their appointment within a predetermined period. Only 4% of the patients wanted to change or cancel the consultation. A total of 122 of the 300 (40.1%) patients approached, filled-in a questionnaire to reflect on the DCP. Patients experienced DCP as an improvement of consultation, more time-efficient, increasing patients' and health care providers' preparation, increasing a feeling of acknowledgement and improving co-decision on type of consultation. The DCP did not attribute to co-deciding on treatment.

Conclusion

DCP was perceived as an improvement of the standard outpatient care by both health care providers and patients with automated integration into the electronic patient record being of key importance.

Rapid Expansion of a Teledermatology Web Application for Digital Dermatology Assessment Necessitated by the COVID-19 Pandemic: Retrospective Evaluation

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a change in the provision of outpatient care in dermatology.

OBJECTIVE

A novel, asynchronous, digital consultation platform was codeveloped with 2 National Health Service dermatology teams to improve access and enhance choice in outpatient care.

METHODS

The rollout of the platform was accelerated during the initial COVID-19 lockdown, and its wider use across 2 Scottish health boards was retrospectively evaluated. Integrated with the hospital booking system and electronic patient record, the platform provides an alternative to face-to-face consultations, using information and images submitted by the patients.

RESULTS

In total, 297 new patient consultations and 108 return patient consultations were assessed, and 80% (324/405) of the images submitted were of satisfactory quality. The consultations were, on average, 3 minutes shorter than equivalent face-to-face interactions, and a total of 5758 km of patient travel was avoided. Outcomes included web-based reviews (66/405, 16.3%), face-to-face reviews (190/405, 46.9%), biopsies (46/405, 11.4%), discharge (89/405, 22%), and other treatments or investigations (14/405, 3.5%). High levels of patient satisfaction (92/112, 82.1%) were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital dermatology assessments are now included in the choices for consultation types that are available to patients, helping to augment service capacity during pandemic recovery.

Synthesis of the Evidence on What Works for Whom in Telemental Health: Rapid Realist Review

BACKGROUND

Telemental health (delivering mental health care via video calls, telephone calls, or SMS text messages) is becoming increasingly widespread. Telemental health appears to be useful and effective in providing care to some service users in some settings, especially during an emergency restricting face-to-face contact, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, important limitations have been reported, and telemental health implementation risks the reinforcement of pre-existing inequalities in service provision. If it is to be widely incorporated into routine care, a clear understanding is needed of when and for whom it is an acceptable and effective approach and when face-to-face care is needed.

OBJECTIVE

This rapid realist review aims to develop a theory about which telemental health approaches work (or do not work), for whom, in which contexts, and through what mechanisms.

METHODS

Rapid realist reviewing involves synthesizing relevant evidence and stakeholder expertise to allow timely development of context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) configurations in areas where evidence is urgently needed to inform policy and practice. The CMO configurations encapsulate theories about what works for whom and by what mechanisms. Sources included eligible papers from 2 previous systematic reviews conducted by our team on telemental health; an updated search using the strategy from these reviews; a call for relevant evidence, including "gray literature," to the public and key experts; and website searches of relevant voluntary and statutory organizations. CMO configurations formulated from these sources were iteratively refined, including through discussions with an expert reference group, including researchers with relevant lived experience and frontline clinicians, and consultation with experts focused on three priority groups: children and young people, users of inpatient and crisis care services, and digitally excluded groups.

RESULTS

A total of 108 scientific and gray literature sources were included. From our initial CMO configurations, we derived 30 overarching CMO configurations within four domains: connecting effectively; flexibility and personalization; safety, privacy, and confidentiality; and therapeutic quality and relationship. Reports and stakeholder input emphasized the importance of personal choice, privacy and safety, and therapeutic relationships in telemental health care. The review also identified particular service users likely to be disadvantaged by telemental health implementation and a need to ensure that face-to-face care of equivalent timeliness remains available. Mechanisms underlying the successful and unsuccessful application of telemental health are discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Service user choice, privacy and safety, the ability to connect effectively, and fostering strong therapeutic relationships need to be prioritized in delivering telemental health care. Guidelines and strategies coproduced with service users and frontline staff are needed to optimize telemental health implementation in real-world settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO); CRD42021260910; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021260910.

One-Year Remission Rate of Chronic Headache Comparing Video and Face-to-Face Consultations by Neurologist: Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Chronic headache causing severe headache-related disability for those affected by the disease is under- or misdiagnosed in many cases and therefore requires easy access to a specialist for optimal health care management.

Objective

The goal of the research is to determine whether video consultations are noninferior to face-to-face consultations in treating chronic headache patients referred to a specialist in Northern Norway.

Methods

Patients included in the study were recruited from general practice referrals to a specialist at a neurological department in Northern Norway (Tromsø) and diagnosed according to the International Headache Society classification system. In a randomized controlled design, the 1-year remission rate of chronic headache (change from ≥15 to <15 headache days per month during the last 3 months), patient satisfaction with a specialist consultation, and need for follow-up consultations by general practitioners were compared between groups consulted by video and face-to-face in a post hoc analysis. Data were collected by interview (baseline) and questionnaire (follow-up).

Results

From a baseline cohort of 402 headache patients consecutively referred from general practice to a specialist over 2.5 years, 58.0% (233/402) were classified as chronic headache and included in this study. Response rates were 71.7% (86/120) in the video group and 67.3% (76/113) in the face-to-face group. One-year remission from chronic headache was achieved in 43.0% (37/86) in the video group and 39.5% (30/76) in the face-to-face group (P=.38). Patient satisfaction with consultations were 86.5% (32/37; video) and 93.3% (28/30; face-to-face; P=.25). A total of 30% (11/37) in the video group and 53% (16/30) in the face-to-face group consulted general practitioners during the follow-up period (P=.03), and median number of consultations was 1 (IQR 0-13) and 1.5 (IQR 0-15), respectively (P=.19).

Conclusions

One-year remission rate from chronic headache was about 40% regardless of consultation form. Likewise, patient satisfaction with consultation and need for follow-up visits in general practice post consultation was similar. Treating chronic headache patients by using video consultations is not inferior to face-to-face consultations and may be used in clinical neurological practice.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02270177; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02270177