Cargando…
Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of using a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience and cost in the care of women with urinary incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women, aged > 18 years referred to a urogynaecology unit were randomised to either (1) A Standard Clinic or (2) A Virtual Clinic. Bot...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5773012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29346378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189174 |
_version_ | 1783293490348687360 |
---|---|
author | Jones, Georgina Brennan, Victoria Jacques, Richard Wood, Hilary Dixon, Simon Radley, Stephen |
author_facet | Jones, Georgina Brennan, Victoria Jacques, Richard Wood, Hilary Dixon, Simon Radley, Stephen |
author_sort | Jones, Georgina |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of using a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience and cost in the care of women with urinary incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women, aged > 18 years referred to a urogynaecology unit were randomised to either (1) A Standard Clinic or (2) A Virtual Clinic. Both groups completed a validated, web-based interactive, patient-reported outome measure (ePAQ-Pelvic Floor), in advance of their appointment followed by either a telephone consultation (Virtual Clinic) or face-to-face consultation (Standard Care). The primary outcome was the mean ‘short-term outcome scale’ score on the Patient Experience Questionnaire (PEQ). Secondary Outcome Measures included the other domains of the PEQ (Communications, Emotions and Barriers), Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ), Short-Form 12 (SF-12), personal, societal and NHS costs. RESULTS: 195 women were randomised: 98 received the intervention and 97 received standard care. The primary outcome showed a non-significant difference between the two study arms. No significant differences were also observed on the CSQ and SF-12. However, the intervention group showed significantly higher PEQ domain scores for Communications, Emotions and Barriers (including following adjustment for age and parity). Whilst standard care was overall more cost-effective, this was minimal (£38.04). The virtual clinic also significantly reduced consultation time (10.94 minutes, compared with a mean duration of 25.9 minutes respectively) and consultation costs compared to usual care (£31.75 versus £72.17 respectively), thus presenting potential cost-savings in out-patient management. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual clinical had no impact on the short-term dimension of the PEQ and overall was not as cost-effective as standard care, due to greater clinic re-attendances in this group. In the virtual clinic group, consultation times were briefer, communication experience was enhanced and personal costs lower. For medical conditions of a sensitive or intimate nature, a virtual clinic has potential to support patients to communicate with health professionals about their condition. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5773012 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57730122018-01-26 Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial Jones, Georgina Brennan, Victoria Jacques, Richard Wood, Hilary Dixon, Simon Radley, Stephen PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of using a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience and cost in the care of women with urinary incontinence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women, aged > 18 years referred to a urogynaecology unit were randomised to either (1) A Standard Clinic or (2) A Virtual Clinic. Both groups completed a validated, web-based interactive, patient-reported outome measure (ePAQ-Pelvic Floor), in advance of their appointment followed by either a telephone consultation (Virtual Clinic) or face-to-face consultation (Standard Care). The primary outcome was the mean ‘short-term outcome scale’ score on the Patient Experience Questionnaire (PEQ). Secondary Outcome Measures included the other domains of the PEQ (Communications, Emotions and Barriers), Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ), Short-Form 12 (SF-12), personal, societal and NHS costs. RESULTS: 195 women were randomised: 98 received the intervention and 97 received standard care. The primary outcome showed a non-significant difference between the two study arms. No significant differences were also observed on the CSQ and SF-12. However, the intervention group showed significantly higher PEQ domain scores for Communications, Emotions and Barriers (including following adjustment for age and parity). Whilst standard care was overall more cost-effective, this was minimal (£38.04). The virtual clinic also significantly reduced consultation time (10.94 minutes, compared with a mean duration of 25.9 minutes respectively) and consultation costs compared to usual care (£31.75 versus £72.17 respectively), thus presenting potential cost-savings in out-patient management. CONCLUSIONS: The virtual clinical had no impact on the short-term dimension of the PEQ and overall was not as cost-effective as standard care, due to greater clinic re-attendances in this group. In the virtual clinic group, consultation times were briefer, communication experience was enhanced and personal costs lower. For medical conditions of a sensitive or intimate nature, a virtual clinic has potential to support patients to communicate with health professionals about their condition. Public Library of Science 2018-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5773012/ /pubmed/29346378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189174 Text en © 2018 Jones et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Jones, Georgina Brennan, Victoria Jacques, Richard Wood, Hilary Dixon, Simon Radley, Stephen Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial |
title | Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: a randomised controlled trial |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5773012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29346378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189174 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jonesgeorgina evaluatingtheimpactofavirtualcliniconpatientexperiencepersonalandprovidercostsofcareinurinaryincontinencearandomisedcontrolledtrial AT brennanvictoria evaluatingtheimpactofavirtualcliniconpatientexperiencepersonalandprovidercostsofcareinurinaryincontinencearandomisedcontrolledtrial AT jacquesrichard evaluatingtheimpactofavirtualcliniconpatientexperiencepersonalandprovidercostsofcareinurinaryincontinencearandomisedcontrolledtrial AT woodhilary evaluatingtheimpactofavirtualcliniconpatientexperiencepersonalandprovidercostsofcareinurinaryincontinencearandomisedcontrolledtrial AT dixonsimon evaluatingtheimpactofavirtualcliniconpatientexperiencepersonalandprovidercostsofcareinurinaryincontinencearandomisedcontrolledtrial AT radleystephen evaluatingtheimpactofavirtualcliniconpatientexperiencepersonalandprovidercostsofcareinurinaryincontinencearandomisedcontrolledtrial |