Greenhalgh Trisha, Vijayaraghavan Shanti, Wherton Joe, Shaw Sara, Byrne Emma, Campbell-Richards Desirée, Bhattacharya Satya, Hanson Philippa, Ramoutar Seendy, Gutteridge Charles, Hodkinson Isabel, Collard Anna, Morris Joanne
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
BMJ Open. 2016 Jan 29;6(1):e009388. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009388.
Remote video consultations between clinician and patient are technically possible and increasingly acceptable. They are being introduced in some settings alongside (and occasionally replacing) face-to-face or telephone consultations.
To explore the advantages and limitations of video consultations, we will conduct in-depth qualitative studies of real consultations (microlevel) embedded in an organisational case study (mesolevel), taking account of national context (macrolevel). The study is based in 2 contrasting clinical settings (diabetes and cancer) in a National Health Service (NHS) acute trust in London, UK. Main data sources are: microlevel--audio, video and screen capture to produce rich multimodal data on 45 remote consultations; mesolevel--interviews, ethnographic observations and analysis of documents within the trust; macrolevel--key informant interviews of national-level stakeholders and document analysis. Data will be analysed and synthesised using a sociotechnical framework developed from structuration theory.
City Road and Hampstead NHS Research Ethics Committee, 9 December 2014, reference 14/LO/1883.
We plan outputs for 5 main audiences: (1) academics: research publications and conference presentations; (2) service providers: standard operating procedures, provisional operational guidance and key safety issues; (3) professional bodies and defence societies: summary of relevant findings to inform guidance to members; (4) policymakers: summary of key findings; (5) patients and carers: 'what to expect in your virtual consultation'.
The research literature on video consultations is sparse. Such consultations offer potential advantages to patients (who are spared the cost and inconvenience of travel) and the healthcare system (eg, they may be more cost-effective), but fears have been expressed that they may be clinically risky and/or less acceptable to patients or staff, and they bring significant technical, logistical and regulatory challenges. We anticipate that this study will contribute to a balanced assessment of when, how and in what circumstances this model might be introduced.
临床医生与患者之间的远程视频会诊在技术上是可行的,并且越来越被接受。在一些情况下,它们与面对面或电话会诊同时引入(偶尔替代)。
为了探讨视频会诊的优点和局限性,我们将在考虑国家背景(宏观层面)的组织案例研究(中观层面)中嵌入对实际会诊(微观层面)进行深入的定性研究。该研究基于英国伦敦一家国民健康服务(NHS)急性信托机构中两个形成对比的临床环境(糖尿病和癌症)。主要数据来源包括:微观层面——音频、视频和屏幕截图,以生成关于45次远程会诊的丰富多模态数据;中观层面——信托机构内部的访谈、人种志观察和文件分析;宏观层面——对国家级利益相关者的关键信息提供者访谈和文件分析。将使用从结构化理论发展而来的社会技术框架对数据进行分析和综合。
城市路和汉普斯特德NHS研究伦理委员会,2014年12月9日,参考号14/LO/1883。
我们计划为5个主要受众提供产出:(1)学者:研究出版物和会议报告;(2)服务提供者:标准操作程序、临时操作指南和关键安全问题;(3)专业团体和辩护协会:相关研究结果摘要,以为向成员提供指导提供信息;(4)政策制定者:关键研究结果摘要;(5)患者和护理人员:“虚拟会诊中您可以期待什么”。
关于视频会诊的研究文献很少。此类会诊为患者(避免了旅行的成本和不便)和医疗系统(例如,它们可能更具成本效益)带来潜在优势,但有人担心它们可能在临床上有风险和/或患者或工作人员较难接受,并且它们带来了重大的技术、后勤和监管挑战。我们预计这项研究将有助于对何时、如何以及在何种情况下引入这种模式进行平衡评估。