Patient reported outcomes with remote orthopaedic consultations by telemedicine: A randomised controlled trial. (September 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Buvik, Astrid; Bugge, Einar; Knutsen, Gunnar; Småbrekke, Arvid; Wilsgaard, Tom
• Is Part Of: Journal of telemedicine and telecare. Volume 25:Number 8(2019)
• Page Start: 451
• Page End: 459
• Publication Date: 2019-09
• Subjects: Telemedicine -- patient satisfaction -- remote consultations -- outpatients -- videoconference -- randomised controlled trial -- orthopaedic -- quality of life; Telecommunication in medicine -- Periodicals; 610
• DOI: 10.1177/1357633X18783921
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1357-633X

Abstract

Introduction: Decentralised services through outreach clinics or modern technology reduce patient travel time and cost to society. Telemedicine consultation through videoconference is one such modality. Here, we compared patient-reported health outcomes and satisfaction between video-assisted remote and standard face-to-face orthopaedic consultations. Methods: This randomised controlled trial included two parallel groups: (1) patients receiving video-assisted remote consultation at a regional medical centre (RMC); and (2) patients receiving standard consultation at the orthopaedic outpatient clinic of the University Hospital of North Norway (UNN). This study included patients referred to or scheduled for a consultation at the orthopaedic outpatient clinic. After each consultation, patient satisfaction was determined using patient-completed questionnaires containing questions on patient-reported health (three-level European quality of life five-dimension index (EQ-5D-3L)/European quality of life visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS)) and questions from a validated OutPatient Experiences Questionnaire (OPEQ). Results: This study included 389 patients, of which 199 received remote consultation and 190 received standard consultation (total of 559 consultations). In all, 99% RMC-randomised patients and 99% UNN-randomised patients evaluated the consultation as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Moreover, 86% RMC-randomised patients preferred video-assisted consultation as the next consultation. No difference was observed in patient-reported health after 12 months between the two groups. EQ-5D index scores were 0.77 and 0.75 for RMC- and UNN-randomised patients, respectively ( p = 0.42). Discussion: We did not observe any difference in patient-reported satisfaction and health (EQ-5D/EQ-VAS) between video-assisted and standard consultations, suggesting that video-assisted remote consultation can be safely offered to some orthopaedic patients. Moreover, a significantly high proportion of patients selected video-assisted remote consultation as their next consultation, thus strengthening the findings of this study. However, economic aspects should be assessed before widely recommending video-assisted consultation.