SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

A Hybrid Virtual Fracture Clinic is Safe and Efficacious in the COVID-19 Era: Stay at Home and Save Lives

Sharma, A; Butt, MI; Ajayi, B; Perkins, S; Umarji, S; Hing, C; Lui, DF (2021) A Hybrid Virtual Fracture Clinic is Safe and Efficacious in the COVID-19 Era: Stay at Home and Save Lives. CUREUS, 13 (5). e14849. ISSN 2168-8184 https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.14849
SGUL Authors: Hing, Caroline Blanca

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (463kB) | Preview

Abstract

Introduction The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated a change in the manner outpatient fracture clinics are conducted due to the need to reduce footfall in hospitals. While studies regarding virtual fracture clinics have shown these to be useful and effective, they focus exclusively on remote consultations. However, our service was bespoke to the patient - either a face-to-face, a telephone consultation or both, depending on patient need - a ‘hybrid virtual fracture clinic' (HVFC). We report patient satisfaction and outcomes with this service from the first wave of the pandemic. Methods We retrospectively interviewed patients who availed of the HVFC service at our institution during the first two weeks of national lockdown in England from March 23 to April 5, 2020. The number and type of consultations, patient vulnerability to COVID-19, and type of management (surgical vs non-surgical) were among the factors taken into consideration. Patient experience was assessed using the Net Promoter Score (NPS), Customer Effort Score (CES), and Customer Satisfaction Score (CSS) on a scale of 0-10. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the EuroQol-5D-5L score (including EQ Visual Analogue Scale {EQ-VAS} scoring on a scale of 0-100). Results The mean overall NPS, CES, and CSS for the service were 7.32, 7.24, and 7.49, respectively. The mean self-reported EQ-VAS rating was 77.5. Of 442 consultations, 246 were conducted virtually; 10% were face-to-face, 29% virtual, and 61% were hybrid consultations. The HVFC resulted in a 55.65% reduction in footfall. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference across any outcome measure when compared between hybrid, virtual, and face-to-face consultations. Patients vulnerable to COVID-19 and those who did not require surgery tended to report better overall scores. Conclusion Our study indicates that the HVFC format can reduce patient footfall significantly (>50%) while providing effective and satisfactory outpatient care. There appears to be no difference in patient-reported outcomes between face-to-face consultations and hybrid or virtual consultations. Patients would recommend HVFC to family and friends, found it was easy to use, and reported good satisfaction with the service.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © Copyright 2021 Sharma et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY 4.0., which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Keywords: fracture clinic, virtual clinic, hybrid clinics, covid-19, remote consultations
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute (MCS)
Journal or Publication Title: CUREUS
ISSN: 2168-8184
Dates:
DateEvent
5 May 2021Published
2 May 2021Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Web of Science ID: WOS:000647625500001
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/113289
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.14849

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item