Paul Wainwright

Virtual outreach: economic evaluation of joint teleconsultations for patients referred by their general practitioner for a specialist opinion

Abstract Objectives To test the hypotheses that, compared with conventional outpatient consultations, joint teleconsultation (virtual outreach) would incur no increased costs to the NHS, reduce costs to patients, and reduce absences from work by patients and their carers. Design Cost consequences study alongside randomised controlled trial. Setting Two hospitals in London and Shrewsbury and 29 general practices in inner London and Wales. Participants 3170 patients identified; 2094 eligible for inclusion and willing to participate. 1051 randomised to virtual outreach and 1043 to standard outpatient appointments. Main outcome measures NHS costs, patient costs, health status (SF-12), time spent attending index consultation, patient satisfaction. Results Overall six months costs were greater for the virtual outreach consultations (£724 per patient) than for conventional outpatient appointments (£625): difference in means £99 (

Design and performance of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of joint tele-consultations (ISRCTN54264250)

162; €138) (95% confidence interval £10 to £187, P=0.03). If the analysis is restricted to resource items deemed “attributable” to the index consultation, six month costs were still greater for virtual outreach: difference in means £108 (£73 to £142, P < 0.0001). In both analyses the index consultation accounted for the excess cost. Savings to patients in terms of costs and time occurred in both centres: difference in mean total patient cost £8 (£5 to £10, P < 0.0001). Loss of productive time was less in the virtual outreach group: difference in mean cost £11 (£10 to £12, P < 0.0001). Conclusion The main hypothesis that virtual outreach would be cost neutral is rejected, but the hypotheses that costs to patients and losses in productivity would be lower are supported.

Ethics: The heart of Health Care (2nd ed)

BackgroundAppropriate information flow is crucial to the care of patients, particularly at the interface between primary and secondary care. Communication problems can result from inadequate organisation and training, There is a major expectation that information and communication technologies may offer solutions, but little reliable evidence. This paper reports the design and performance of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial (RCT), unparalleled in telemedicine research in either scale or range of outcomes. The study investigated the effectiveness and cost implications in rural and inner-city settings of using videoconferencing to perform joint tele-consultations as an alternative to general practitioner referral to the hospital specialist in the outpatient clinic.MethodsJoint tele-consultation services were established in both the Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust in inner London, and the Royal Shrewsbury Hospitals Trust, in Shropshire. All the patients who gave consent to participate were randomised either to joint tele-consultation or to a routine outpatients appointment. The principal outcome measures included the frequency of decision by the specialist to offer a follow-up outpatient appointment, patient satisfaction (Ware Specific Questionnaire), wellbeing (SF12) and enablement (PEI), numbers of tests, investigations, procedures and treatments.ResultsA total of 134 general practitioners operating from 29 practices participated in the trial, referring a total of 3170 patients to 20 specialists in ENT medicine, general medicine (including endocrinology, and rheumatology), gastroenterology, orthopaedics, neurology and urology. Of these, 2094 patients consented to participate in the study and were correctly randomised. There was a 91% response rate to the initial assessment questionnaires, and analysis showed equivalence for all key characteristics between the treatment and control groups.ConclusionWe have designed and performed a major multi-centre trial of teleconsultations in two contrasting centres. Many problems were overcome to enable the trial to be carried out, with a considerable development and learning phase. A lengthier development phase might have enabled us to improve the patient selection criteria, but there is a window of opportunity for these developments, and we believe that our approach was appropriate, allowing the evaluation of the technology before its widespread implementation.

What are local issues? The problem of the local review of research

The second edition of Seedhouses well-known book comes ten years after the first. Like the first, the second edition will undoubtedly be well received by many, including teachers, students and practitioners of health care. Indeed one is tempted to suggest that, if a medical or nursing student read only one ethics text in the course of his or her training, then this would be a good choice. If students and practitioners of health care management, policy-makers and civil servants could also be persuaded to read it then this would be a bonus. Seedhouses style is highly personal and individual. He takes pleasure in being irreverent, provocative and controversial. This is most certainly not a textbook in the academic tradition of neutrality and impartialism. Seedhouse has a clear agenda of his own and strongly held views about the nature of health care and the place of ethics within that domain. He is self- assured and self-confident almost to the point of arrogance, writing un-selfconsciously of the “secret of the books success”, describing the work as “genuinely philosophy applied” and “long overdue”. “Here …

Is the 2008 NMC Code ethical

Local review of research by ethics committees in the UK has long been held to be an important right of the local research ethics committee and, even with the introduction of the European Clinical Trials Directive, the governance arrangements for research ethics committees continue to allow for local review of multicentre studies. There is no requirement for local review in either the European Union directive or in the guidelines on good clinical practice, and there is little evidence of it anywhere else in Europe. The idea that there can be “local”, as opposed to “central” ethical issues in research is an interesting one, which raises important issues about the nature of research ethics and ethical review. The aim of this paper is to argue that there are no such things as local issues in research ethics, and suggest that those questions currently addressed as local issues properly belong within the research governance framework.

Education and training of practice nurses

In 2008 the United Kingdom Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) published the latest version of its code of conduct (The code: standards of conduct, performance and ethics for nurses and midwives). The new version marked a significant change of style in the Code compared with previous versions. There has been considerable controversy and the accrual of an extensive body of literature over the years in the UK and Europe criticizing nursing codes of ethics and questioning their ethical standing and their usefulness. In this article we review the current NMC Code. We argue that the NMC has been misguided in labelling the Code as a code of ethics, and suggest that the new document falls short in many respects.

Community Nurses and Health Promotion: Ethical and Political Perspectives

Seventeen nurses in eight rural general practices participated in a distance education project. Low-cost videoconferencing equipment was assessed for its suitability in two training sessions, concerning asthma and travel immunization. The intended learning outcomes were reached and although initially apprehensive, the nurses quickly became accustomed to the medium. Videoconferencing has now become an accepted part of in-service training. Technical reliability remains the most important problem.

Design and Performance of a Multicentre, Randomized Controlled Trial of Teleconsulting

This paper brings together ideas from two perspectives on ethics and health promotion. A discussion of the ethical dimension of the health promotion practice of community nurses is set in the wider context of health policy, with particular reference to health gain and individual responsibility. It is widely held that nurses have a key role to play in health promotion and that this is particularly the case for nurses working in primary health care. This assumption is reinforced by policy documents from the World Health Organization, the Department of Health and statutory bodies such as the United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting. The approach of many nurses to health promotion has tended on the one hand to be somewhat naive and on the other to be authoritarian and didactic; there has been little discussion in the nursing literature of the ethical aspects of health promotion. However, recent developments in nurse education, such as Project 2000 and the consequent changes to preregistration programmes, have resulted in increased attention to both ethics and health promotion within the curriculum.

Virtual outreach: a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of joint teleconferenced medical consultations

We have designed and performed a multicentre, randomized controlled trial of teleconsulting. The trial investigated the effectiveness and cost implications in rural and inner-city settings of using videoconferencing as an alternative to general practitioner referral to a hospital specialist. The participating general practitioners referred a total of 3170 patients who satisfied the entry criteria. Of these, 1040 (33%) failed to provide consent or otherwise refused to participate in the trial. Of the patients recruited to the trial, a total of 1902 (91%) completed and returned the baseline questionnaire. Although the trial was successful in recruiting sufficient patients and in obtaining high questionnaire response rates, the findings will require careful interpretation to take account of the limits which the protocol placed on the ability of general practitioners to select patients for referral.