Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2003 Jul 12;327(7406):84.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7406.84.

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

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

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

P B Jacklin et al. BMJ. .

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 ( pound 724 per patient) than for conventional outpatient appointments ( pound 625): difference in means pound 99 ($162; 138) (95% confidence interval pound 10 to pound 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 pound 108 ( pound 73 to pound 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 pound 8 ( pound 5 to pound 10, P < 0.0001). Loss of productive time was less in the virtual outreach group: difference in mean cost pound 11 ( pound 10 to pound 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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Difference in mean total NHS cost (£) between virtual outreach and standard outpatients groups (P=0.17 for treatment interaction with site; P=0.19 for interaction with specialty)
Fig 2
Fig 2
Difference in mean total attributable NHS cost (£) between virtual outreach and standard outpatients groups (P=0.52 for treatment interaction with site; P=0.02 for interaction with specialty)

References

    1. Roland M. Measuring referral rates. In: Roland M, Coulter A, eds. Hospital referrals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992: 62-75.
    1. Wallace P, Hopkins A, eds. Referral to medical outpatients—different agendas of patients, general practitioners and hospital physicians. London: Royal College of Physicians, 1992.
    1. Marshall M. How well do general practitioners and hospital specialists work together? A qualitative study of co-operation and conflict within the medical profession. Br J Gen Pract 1998;48: 1379-82. - PMC - PubMed
    1. European study of referrals from primary to secondary care. London: Royal College of General Practitioners, 1992. (Occasional paper 56.) - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marsh GN. Are follow-up consultations at medical outpatient departments futile? BMJ 1982;284: 1176-7. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types