Nathan A. Seven MD , Karen A. Truitt DO , Ross A. Dierkhising MS , Nathan P. Young DO
{"title":"社区神经病学实践中的电子会诊:为最佳实践提供依据的回顾性研究","authors":"Nathan A. Seven MD , Karen A. Truitt DO , Ross A. Dierkhising MS , Nathan P. Young DO","doi":"10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2023.11.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To describe our practice of electronic consultations (e-consults) and assess safety and risk factors for subsequent face-to-face consultations.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><p>A retrospective cohort study of all e-consults completed in a community neurology practice between May 5, 2018, and June 31, 2019, was completed. Clinical and demographic variables were compared between the successful and unsuccessful (defined by presence of subsequent face-to-face consultation) cohorts. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using Cox regression model. Kaplan-Meier probability analysis (with 95% CIs) of subsequent face-to-face consultation was performed. Case examples highlighting potential harm were summarized.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 302 e-consults were reviewed. The most frequent referrals were for headache (n=125, 41.4%), dysesthesia (n=40, 13.2%), and abnormal imaging finding (n=27, 8.9%). The most common e-consult questions were for treatment (57.6%) and diagnostic evaluation (48.0%) recommendations. Moreover, 24.8% (n=75) of e-consults were followed by face-to-face consultations, with primary risk factors including female sex (HR, 1.9), referral for headache (HR, 1.7), and final diagnosis of migraine (HR, 2.0) or long-term migraine (HR, 5.0). Potential harm related to delayed diagnosis/treatment was identified in 6 (2.0%) patients with migraine and 4 (1.3%) without migraine presenting to emergency department.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Utilization of e-consults may safely improve access to neurologic expertise and prevent the need for some visits, which may have required a face-to-face visit. In patients with chronic migraine, e-consults should be considered short-term and followed by face-to-face consultation as soon as access allows. Neurologists performing e-consults should be able to triage patients to face-to-face consultation, particularly when diagnosis is uncertain or the neurologic examination may help guide appropriate testing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":94132,"journal":{"name":"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542454823000747/pdfft?md5=34d543c79ed67e1a33863ede1816bd8e&pid=1-s2.0-S2542454823000747-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Electronic Consultations in a Community Neurology Practice: A Retrospective Study Informing Best Practice\",\"authors\":\"Nathan A. Seven MD , Karen A. Truitt DO , Ross A. Dierkhising MS , Nathan P. Young DO\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2023.11.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To describe our practice of electronic consultations (e-consults) and assess safety and risk factors for subsequent face-to-face consultations.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and Methods</h3><p>A retrospective cohort study of all e-consults completed in a community neurology practice between May 5, 2018, and June 31, 2019, was completed. Clinical and demographic variables were compared between the successful and unsuccessful (defined by presence of subsequent face-to-face consultation) cohorts. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using Cox regression model. Kaplan-Meier probability analysis (with 95% CIs) of subsequent face-to-face consultation was performed. Case examples highlighting potential harm were summarized.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 302 e-consults were reviewed. The most frequent referrals were for headache (n=125, 41.4%), dysesthesia (n=40, 13.2%), and abnormal imaging finding (n=27, 8.9%). The most common e-consult questions were for treatment (57.6%) and diagnostic evaluation (48.0%) recommendations. Moreover, 24.8% (n=75) of e-consults were followed by face-to-face consultations, with primary risk factors including female sex (HR, 1.9), referral for headache (HR, 1.7), and final diagnosis of migraine (HR, 2.0) or long-term migraine (HR, 5.0). Potential harm related to delayed diagnosis/treatment was identified in 6 (2.0%) patients with migraine and 4 (1.3%) without migraine presenting to emergency department.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Utilization of e-consults may safely improve access to neurologic expertise and prevent the need for some visits, which may have required a face-to-face visit. In patients with chronic migraine, e-consults should be considered short-term and followed by face-to-face consultation as soon as access allows. Neurologists performing e-consults should be able to triage patients to face-to-face consultation, particularly when diagnosis is uncertain or the neurologic examination may help guide appropriate testing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94132,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542454823000747/pdfft?md5=34d543c79ed67e1a33863ede1816bd8e&pid=1-s2.0-S2542454823000747-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542454823000747\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542454823000747","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Electronic Consultations in a Community Neurology Practice: A Retrospective Study Informing Best Practice
Objective
To describe our practice of electronic consultations (e-consults) and assess safety and risk factors for subsequent face-to-face consultations.
Patients and Methods
A retrospective cohort study of all e-consults completed in a community neurology practice between May 5, 2018, and June 31, 2019, was completed. Clinical and demographic variables were compared between the successful and unsuccessful (defined by presence of subsequent face-to-face consultation) cohorts. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using Cox regression model. Kaplan-Meier probability analysis (with 95% CIs) of subsequent face-to-face consultation was performed. Case examples highlighting potential harm were summarized.
Results
In total, 302 e-consults were reviewed. The most frequent referrals were for headache (n=125, 41.4%), dysesthesia (n=40, 13.2%), and abnormal imaging finding (n=27, 8.9%). The most common e-consult questions were for treatment (57.6%) and diagnostic evaluation (48.0%) recommendations. Moreover, 24.8% (n=75) of e-consults were followed by face-to-face consultations, with primary risk factors including female sex (HR, 1.9), referral for headache (HR, 1.7), and final diagnosis of migraine (HR, 2.0) or long-term migraine (HR, 5.0). Potential harm related to delayed diagnosis/treatment was identified in 6 (2.0%) patients with migraine and 4 (1.3%) without migraine presenting to emergency department.
Conclusion
Utilization of e-consults may safely improve access to neurologic expertise and prevent the need for some visits, which may have required a face-to-face visit. In patients with chronic migraine, e-consults should be considered short-term and followed by face-to-face consultation as soon as access allows. Neurologists performing e-consults should be able to triage patients to face-to-face consultation, particularly when diagnosis is uncertain or the neurologic examination may help guide appropriate testing.