Emily McMullen, Megan Robson, Mark Paul Brewin, Poonam Valand, Leela Sayed, Jessica Steele
{"title":"Clinical decision making in the provision of audiovisual care for upper limb trauma: a survey of UK experiences.","authors":"Emily McMullen, Megan Robson, Mark Paul Brewin, Poonam Valand, Leela Sayed, Jessica Steele","doi":"10.1177/1758998320972132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>For many patients, audio-visual appointments have provided a timely and efficient way of seeking advice, assessment and treatment for their hand injuries during the NHS response to COVID-19. This study aimed to explore the experience of hand units across the UK in determining the safe and judicious use of audio-visual outpatient care for the management of acute upper limb trauma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online cross-sectional survey was sent to the therapy leads of hand units across the UK. Questions focused on the experience of using audio-visual technology in the management of upper limb trauma, and the relevant factors in determining its appropriate use. A deductive mixed methods analysis was used to identify both common themes and capture community experience and characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 51 out of 76 hand therapy units completed the survey; a response rate of 67%. Of these, 82% (42/51) reported using audio-visual technology to manage upper limb trauma during the UK COVID-19 lockdown. When determining patient suitability for audio-visual consultations, 73% (37/51) of respondents reported the use of COVID-19 guidelines, but only 35% (18/51) reported the use of a clinical decision-making tool. In agreement with our experience at Salisbury Hospital Foundation Trust, 92% (47/51) had concerns relating to the use of audio-visual care.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The choice of safely managed remote care or in-person consultation has, to date, largely relied on the discretion of the clinician. A carefully designed clinical decision-making tool for the management of upper limb trauma is needed for use both in clinical practice and in future service planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":43971,"journal":{"name":"Hand Therapy","volume":"26 1","pages":"17-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1758998320972132","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hand Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1758998320972132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/11/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Introduction: For many patients, audio-visual appointments have provided a timely and efficient way of seeking advice, assessment and treatment for their hand injuries during the NHS response to COVID-19. This study aimed to explore the experience of hand units across the UK in determining the safe and judicious use of audio-visual outpatient care for the management of acute upper limb trauma.
Methods: An online cross-sectional survey was sent to the therapy leads of hand units across the UK. Questions focused on the experience of using audio-visual technology in the management of upper limb trauma, and the relevant factors in determining its appropriate use. A deductive mixed methods analysis was used to identify both common themes and capture community experience and characteristics.
Results: A total of 51 out of 76 hand therapy units completed the survey; a response rate of 67%. Of these, 82% (42/51) reported using audio-visual technology to manage upper limb trauma during the UK COVID-19 lockdown. When determining patient suitability for audio-visual consultations, 73% (37/51) of respondents reported the use of COVID-19 guidelines, but only 35% (18/51) reported the use of a clinical decision-making tool. In agreement with our experience at Salisbury Hospital Foundation Trust, 92% (47/51) had concerns relating to the use of audio-visual care.
Conclusion: The choice of safely managed remote care or in-person consultation has, to date, largely relied on the discretion of the clinician. A carefully designed clinical decision-making tool for the management of upper limb trauma is needed for use both in clinical practice and in future service planning.