Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T16:31:34.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EVALUATION of VIDEO CONSULTATIONS in COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH SETTING- Pilot Project of Service Evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2023

Sadia Tabassum Javaid*
Affiliation:
North Staffordshire Combined Healthcare NHS Trust, Stoke-On-Trent, United Kingdom
Ravindra Belgamwar
Affiliation:
North Staffordshire Combined Healthcare NHS Trust, Stoke-On-Trent, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

To evaluate the overall experience and satisfaction with Attend Anywhere video consultations in adult CMHT. The increased use of the digital world is evident via Ofcom Tele Report 2019. UK Government's Five Year Forward View and initiatives, such as ‘Digital First’, aim to reduce face-to-face consultations. Past reports have shown video consultations to be non-inferior to face-to-face consultations in systematic reviews and qualitative studies.The contagious nature of the COVID-19 outbreak limited face-to-face consultations. This led to video consultations via Attend Anywhere (AA). AA is accessed anywhere via the web on Google or Safari with a good internet connection. It provides a single, consistent entry point with an online waiting area on the service's webpage.

Methods

  1. 1. Two separate questionnaires were designed, one each for service users and staff, to capture relevant information at the end of AA consultation. Additional clinical questions for staff included.

  2. 2. Data were collected anonymously for 2 months from 1st April 2020.

Results

Total respondent 44= 20 service users and 24 staff.

  1. 1. For Service Users:

The respondents’ age range was 19-62 years, 80% females. The majority were follow-ups with three new assessments. About half of them had previous contact with the staff. 15 consultations were carried out by the doctor, four by the psychologist, and one was a joint doctor-psychologist consultation.

95% reported their overall experience to be very good-good. 90% found it easy to use: 95% said they would use it again.

  1. 2. For Staff:

The respondents’ age range was 30-50 years, 87% females. The majority were follow-up assessments with one-third new. 16/24 respondents were doctors and eight psychologists. 58% had a previous meeting with service users.

83% reported the overall experience as very good to good: one third felt it's time-saving. 100% reported it's easy to use, would re-use and recommend to others.

For clinical questions, the responses were very good-good as Rapport 87%; Risk assessment 83%; care plan 83%; History taking 78%; Mental state/Cognition 66% and providing support 65%.

Conclusion

Overall, the majority of respondents at an Adult CMHT found video consultations easy to use with readiness to use them again. Video consultations offer several advantages over telephone reviews, e.g. for developing rapport, assessing mental state, etc.

These data are limited to the pilot project and a detailed review is planned for qualitative information with a larger cohort. Following this successful pilot and promising results, video consultations have been rolled out to other trust clinical areas.

Type
Quality Improvement
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This does not need to be placed under each abstract, just each page is fine.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.