Telemedicine or In-Person: Referral Letter Content Influencing How a Patient Receives Treatment.

Telemedicine reports Pub Date : 2022-05-03 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1089/tmr.2022.0006
Edwin Phillip Greenup, Matthew Page, Daniel Best, Stephanie Ferdinands, Natalie Atkins
{"title":"Telemedicine or In-Person: Referral Letter Content Influencing How a Patient Receives Treatment.","authors":"Edwin Phillip Greenup,&nbsp;Matthew Page,&nbsp;Daniel Best,&nbsp;Stephanie Ferdinands,&nbsp;Natalie Atkins","doi":"10.1089/tmr.2022.0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study investigated hospital-based specialist services that provide both traditional hospital outpatient appointments (in-person) or through a live videoconferencing session (telehealth) to referred patients. Referral letters submitted to these clinics were assessed against an inclusion criterion and grouped according to which of delivery method the patient received for their appointment (in-person or telehealth). These groups were then compared for differences to see what factors, if any, influence the likelihood of a patient being offered a telehealth appointment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An extract of all referral letters meeting inclusion criteria between July 01, 2019 and June 30, 2020 were collected (<i>n</i> = 441). Letters were grouped according to delivery modality (in-person or telehealth) and differences between the groups, including variables such as patient demographics, clinical condition, and urgency and the reviewing clinician were assessed for associations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study observed that where the referring clinician suggested a telehealth appointment for their patient, this was more likely to be offered (38.25%) compared with referrals that did not (7.36%) (<i>x</i> <sup>2</sup> <sub>1</sub> <sub>=</sub> 28.33, <i>p</i> = 0.1857, odds ratio = 2.77). Patients were more likely to be offered a telehealth appointment the further they lived from the treating facility (<i>T =</i> -4.51 on 106.59 df, <i>p</i> = 1.622 e-05). Variation in the selection of delivery modality among reviewing clinicians was also observed (<i>x</i> <sup>2</sup> <sub>1</sub> = 42.334, <i>p</i> < 1.42e-08).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Existing research indicates there is a strong link between the perceptions clinicians as individuals have of telehealth and a willingness to offer this modality to patients. Despite this, specific information about a patient contained within a referral letter may influence the delivery modality that the patient will be offered for their initial appointment. It is important that this information is more routinely included in letters sent by referring clinicians to hospital-based specialist services. It is equally important that when included, this information is identified and actioned by reviewing clinicians in a consistent way. Doing so will benefit patients by increasing the likelihood that they will receive specialist outpatient care in a manner that suits them best.</p>","PeriodicalId":22295,"journal":{"name":"Telemedicine reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9153985/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telemedicine reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/tmr.2022.0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study investigated hospital-based specialist services that provide both traditional hospital outpatient appointments (in-person) or through a live videoconferencing session (telehealth) to referred patients. Referral letters submitted to these clinics were assessed against an inclusion criterion and grouped according to which of delivery method the patient received for their appointment (in-person or telehealth). These groups were then compared for differences to see what factors, if any, influence the likelihood of a patient being offered a telehealth appointment.

Methods: An extract of all referral letters meeting inclusion criteria between July 01, 2019 and June 30, 2020 were collected (n = 441). Letters were grouped according to delivery modality (in-person or telehealth) and differences between the groups, including variables such as patient demographics, clinical condition, and urgency and the reviewing clinician were assessed for associations.

Results: This study observed that where the referring clinician suggested a telehealth appointment for their patient, this was more likely to be offered (38.25%) compared with referrals that did not (7.36%) (x 2 1= 28.33, p = 0.1857, odds ratio = 2.77). Patients were more likely to be offered a telehealth appointment the further they lived from the treating facility (T = -4.51 on 106.59 df, p = 1.622 e-05). Variation in the selection of delivery modality among reviewing clinicians was also observed (x 2 1 = 42.334, p < 1.42e-08).

Discussion: Existing research indicates there is a strong link between the perceptions clinicians as individuals have of telehealth and a willingness to offer this modality to patients. Despite this, specific information about a patient contained within a referral letter may influence the delivery modality that the patient will be offered for their initial appointment. It is important that this information is more routinely included in letters sent by referring clinicians to hospital-based specialist services. It is equally important that when included, this information is identified and actioned by reviewing clinicians in a consistent way. Doing so will benefit patients by increasing the likelihood that they will receive specialist outpatient care in a manner that suits them best.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

远程医疗还是面对面:转诊信内容影响患者接受治疗的方式。
目的:本研究调查了以医院为基础的专科服务,为转诊患者提供传统的医院门诊预约(面对面)或通过实时视频会议(远程医疗)。根据纳入标准对提交给这些诊所的转诊信进行评估,并根据患者预约时接受的送达方式(当面或远程保健)进行分组。然后比较这些组的差异,看看是什么因素(如果有的话)影响了患者接受远程医疗预约的可能性。方法:选取2019年7月1日至2020年6月30日期间符合纳入标准的所有推荐信(n = 441)。根据递送方式(当面或远程医疗)和组间差异(包括患者人口统计、临床状况和紧急程度等变量)对信件进行分组,并评估审查临床医生的关联。结果:本研究观察到,当转诊医生建议患者进行远程医疗预约时,与不建议患者进行远程医疗预约的转诊医生(7.36%)相比,患者更有可能进行远程医疗预约(38.25%)(x 21 = 28.33, p = 0.1857,优势比= 2.77)。患者住得离治疗机构越远,越有可能获得远程医疗预约(T = -4.51 (106.59 df), p = 1.622 e-05)。讨论:现有的研究表明,临床医生作为个人对远程医疗的看法与向患者提供这种方式的意愿之间存在着很强的联系。尽管如此,转诊信中包含的关于患者的具体信息可能会影响患者首次预约时的交付方式。重要的是,将这些信息更常规地包括在将临床医生转介到医院的专家服务所发出的信件中。同样重要的是,当纳入这些信息时,应由审查临床医生以一致的方式确定并采取行动。这样做将增加患者接受最适合他们的专科门诊护理的可能性,从而使患者受益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信