正畸和口腔颌面外科的远程预约:第1部分服务评价。

IF 1.4 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Gurdeep Kaur Hans, Nigel Peter Hunt, Helen Travess
{"title":"正畸和口腔颌面外科的远程预约:第1部分服务评价。","authors":"Gurdeep Kaur Hans, Nigel Peter Hunt, Helen Travess","doi":"10.1177/14653125241301452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the type, number and outcome of remote appointments in Orthodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) in one acute hospital trust and to establish whether remote appointments carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic were successful in saving a face-to-face appointment.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Service evaluation.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Orthodontic and OMFS departments at Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A retrospective service evaluation was carried out, analysing the types, numbers and outcomes of remote appointments in Orthodontics and OMFS over a nine-month period (March-December 2020) during the Covid-19 pandemic in one hospital trust. Data were collected from the trust online booking system and departmental spreadsheets and recorded on Microsoft<sup>®</sup> Excel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 901 remote appointments were analysed, 42% (n = 387) of which were Orthodontic and 58% (n = 523) OMFS. Low failure to attend rates were seen in both specialties (3% (n = 18) OMFS; 6% (n = 21) Orthodontics). Retainer reviews accounted for 83% (n = 315) of all Orthodontic remote appointments and the most common outcome of remote appointments was discharge after attendance (49% n = 189). New patient consultations accounted for 41% (n = 212) of OMFS remote appointments and the most common outcomes were Oral Medicine review (31% n = 162) and discharge following attendance (20% n = 103). Remote platforms saved a follow-up face-to-face appointment in 92% (n = 352) of Orthodontic appointments, compared to 81% (n = 421) for OMFS remote appointments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When appropriately triaged, the majority of remote appointments do save a face-to-face visit, and there is a place for remote platforms in both specialties going forward. However further research is required in the post-pandemic era to ascertain the full long-term applicability of remote Orthodontic and OMFS appointments.</p>","PeriodicalId":16677,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthodontics","volume":" ","pages":"14653125241301452"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Remote appointments in Orthodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: Part 1 service evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"Gurdeep Kaur Hans, Nigel Peter Hunt, Helen Travess\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14653125241301452\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the type, number and outcome of remote appointments in Orthodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) in one acute hospital trust and to establish whether remote appointments carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic were successful in saving a face-to-face appointment.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Service evaluation.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Orthodontic and OMFS departments at Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A retrospective service evaluation was carried out, analysing the types, numbers and outcomes of remote appointments in Orthodontics and OMFS over a nine-month period (March-December 2020) during the Covid-19 pandemic in one hospital trust. Data were collected from the trust online booking system and departmental spreadsheets and recorded on Microsoft<sup>®</sup> Excel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 901 remote appointments were analysed, 42% (n = 387) of which were Orthodontic and 58% (n = 523) OMFS. Low failure to attend rates were seen in both specialties (3% (n = 18) OMFS; 6% (n = 21) Orthodontics). Retainer reviews accounted for 83% (n = 315) of all Orthodontic remote appointments and the most common outcome of remote appointments was discharge after attendance (49% n = 189). New patient consultations accounted for 41% (n = 212) of OMFS remote appointments and the most common outcomes were Oral Medicine review (31% n = 162) and discharge following attendance (20% n = 103). Remote platforms saved a follow-up face-to-face appointment in 92% (n = 352) of Orthodontic appointments, compared to 81% (n = 421) for OMFS remote appointments.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When appropriately triaged, the majority of remote appointments do save a face-to-face visit, and there is a place for remote platforms in both specialties going forward. However further research is required in the post-pandemic era to ascertain the full long-term applicability of remote Orthodontic and OMFS appointments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16677,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthodontics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"14653125241301452\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14653125241301452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14653125241301452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估某急性医院信托正畸口腔颌面外科(OMFS)远程预约的类型、数量和结果,并确定在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间实施远程预约是否成功地节省了面对面预约。设计:服务评估。设置:正畸和OMFS部门在白金汉郡医疗保健NHS信托。方法:开展回顾性服务评估,分析某医院信托在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间(2020年3月- 12月)远程预约正畸和OMFS的类型、数量和结果。数据从信托在线预订系统和部门电子表格中收集,并记录在Microsoft®Excel中。结果:共分析901例远程预约,其中正畸预约占42% (n = 387), OMFS预约占58% (n = 523)。两个专科的失败率都很低(3% (n = 18));6% (n = 21)正畸。固位器复查占所有正畸远程预约的83% (n = 315),远程预约最常见的结果是就诊后出院(49% n = 189)。新患者问诊占OMFS远程预约的41% (n = 212),最常见的结果是口腔医学复查(31% n = 162)和就诊后出院(20% n = 103)。远程平台节省了92% (n = 352)的正畸预约,而OMFS远程预约节省了81% (n = 421)的正畸预约。结论:如果经过适当的分类,大多数远程预约确实节省了面对面的就诊,并且远程平台在这两个专业中都有一席之地。然而,在大流行后时代,需要进一步研究以确定远程正畸和OMFS预约的全面长期适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Remote appointments in Orthodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: Part 1 service evaluation.

Objective: To assess the type, number and outcome of remote appointments in Orthodontics and Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMFS) in one acute hospital trust and to establish whether remote appointments carried out during the Covid-19 pandemic were successful in saving a face-to-face appointment.

Design: Service evaluation.

Setting: Orthodontic and OMFS departments at Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust.

Method: A retrospective service evaluation was carried out, analysing the types, numbers and outcomes of remote appointments in Orthodontics and OMFS over a nine-month period (March-December 2020) during the Covid-19 pandemic in one hospital trust. Data were collected from the trust online booking system and departmental spreadsheets and recorded on Microsoft® Excel.

Results: A total of 901 remote appointments were analysed, 42% (n = 387) of which were Orthodontic and 58% (n = 523) OMFS. Low failure to attend rates were seen in both specialties (3% (n = 18) OMFS; 6% (n = 21) Orthodontics). Retainer reviews accounted for 83% (n = 315) of all Orthodontic remote appointments and the most common outcome of remote appointments was discharge after attendance (49% n = 189). New patient consultations accounted for 41% (n = 212) of OMFS remote appointments and the most common outcomes were Oral Medicine review (31% n = 162) and discharge following attendance (20% n = 103). Remote platforms saved a follow-up face-to-face appointment in 92% (n = 352) of Orthodontic appointments, compared to 81% (n = 421) for OMFS remote appointments.

Conclusion: When appropriately triaged, the majority of remote appointments do save a face-to-face visit, and there is a place for remote platforms in both specialties going forward. However further research is required in the post-pandemic era to ascertain the full long-term applicability of remote Orthodontic and OMFS appointments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Orthodontics
Journal of Orthodontics DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
15.40%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthodontics has an international circulation, publishing papers from throughout the world. The official journal of the British Orthodontic Society, it aims to publish high quality, evidence-based, clinically orientated or clinically relevant original research papers that will underpin evidence based orthodontic care. It particularly welcomes reports on prospective research into different treatment methods and techniques but also systematic reviews, meta-analyses and studies which will stimulate interest in new developments. Regular features include original papers on clinically relevant topics, clinical case reports, reviews of the orthodontic literature, editorials, book reviews, correspondence and other features of interest to the orthodontic community. The Journal is published in full colour throughout.
×
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