Read on Twitter
I hesitate to disagree with the Prof, but...
(thread)
@MinalBakhai @dave_dlt @SiliconPractice @murrayellender https://twitter.com/prof_tweet/status/1288839167800152064
(thread)
@MinalBakhai @dave_dlt @SiliconPractice @murrayellender https://twitter.com/prof_tweet/status/1288839167800152064
1. The proportion of consultations where both patient and clinicians think face-to-face is needed is a minority (see @askmygp data), and probably <10% right now, so this is a relatively small problem.
2. Hard to see how we would let the ‘correctly want a F2F’ patients book a F2F appt without triage, without also letting the ‘think they need a F2F but don’t really’ patients do the same.
[It’s not the patient’s fault - why should they be expected to know?]
[It’s not the patient’s fault - why should they be expected to know?]
3. It should take <1min for a clinician to triage an online form and give the patient permission to book a F2F appt at a time of their choosing. The technology isn’t there yet, but this shouldn’t be hard to achieve.
4. Even when F2F is required, the written history in the initial online form can
- save time in the appt
- allow patient to state their history & concerns thoroughly
- give clinician a chance to research the problem
-
time spent documenting the consultation
- save time in the appt
- allow patient to state their history & concerns thoroughly
- give clinician a chance to research the problem
-
time spent documenting the consultation
5. The written history can complement the F2F encounter. Some patients are more open about mental health and other intimate problems online than they would be verbally.
6. For many patients, making the initial contact online is more convenient than by phone, especially for patients who work or have childcare responsibilities.
