Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32175911›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2020

The Use of Patient-Facing Teleconsultations in the National Health Service: Scoping Review.

Micheal O'Cathail, M Ananth Sivanandan, Claire Diver, Poulam Patel, Judith Christian

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
10.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Patient removals: time to rethink exclusion in general practice?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Micheal O'CathailSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9351-294X
M Ananth SivanandanDepartment of Oncology & Radiotherapy, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9417-3348
Claire DiverSchool of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3273-1882
Poulam PatelSchool of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1978-4066
Judith ChristianDepartment of Oncology & Radiotherapy, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8490-3984
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe National Health Service (NHS) Long-Term Plan has set out a vision of enabling patients to access digital interactions with health care professionals within 5 years, including by video link.

objectiveThis review aimed to examine the extent and nature of the use of patient-facing teleconsultations within a health care setting in the United Kingdom and what outcome measures have been assessed.

methodsWe conducted a systematic scoping review of teleconsultation studies following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched up to the end of December 2018 for publications that reported on the use of patient-facing teleconsultations in a UK health care setting.

resultsThe search retrieved 3132 publications, of which 101 were included for a full review. Overall, the studies were heterogeneous in design, in the specialty assessed, and reported outcome measures. The technology used for teleconsultations changed over time with earlier studies employing bespoke, often expensive, solutions. Two-thirds of the studies, conducted between 1995 and 2005, used this method. Later studies transitioned to Web-based commercial solutions such as Skype. There were five outcome measures that were assessed: (1) technical feasibility, (2) user satisfaction, (3) clinical effectiveness, (4) cost, (5) logistical and operational considerations. Due to the changing nature of technology over time, there were differing technical issues across the studies. Generally, teleconsultations were acceptable to patients, but this was less consistent among health care professionals. However, among both groups, face-to-face consultations were still seen as the gold standard. A wide range of clinical scenarios found teleconsultations to be clinically useful but potentially limited to more straightforward clinical interactions. Due to the wide array of study types and changes in technology over time, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions on the cost involved. However, cost savings for health care providers have been demonstrated by the goal-directed implementation of teleconsultations. The integration of technology into routine practice represents a complex problem with barriers identified in funding and hospital reimbursement, information technologies infrastructure, and integration into clinicians' workflow.

conclusionsTeleconsultations appear to be safe and effective in the correct clinical situations. Where offered, it is likely that patients will be keen to engage, although teleconsultations should only be offered as an option to support traditional care models rather than replace them outright. Health care staff should be encouraged and supported in using teleconsultations to diversify their practice. Health care organizations need to consider developing a digital technology strategy and implementation groups to assist health care staff to integrate digitally enabled care into routine practice. The introduction of new technologies should be assessed after a set period with service evaluations, including feedback from key stakeholders.

Indexed as

scoping reviewteleconsultationtelehealthtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID32175911
PMCPMC7105931
OpenAlexW2975827419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.