We hypothesize that video consultations will be valued equivalent with F2F-visits, with a reduction in associated patient costs and total healthcare costs. In addition to that, we hypothesize that patients consider F2F-visits worth the effort and…
ID
Source
Brief title
Health condition
- Tumors of the digestive tract (GI-oncology) - Soft tissue tumors (GI-oncology) - Ischemia (vascular) - Aortic disease (vascular) - Other (vascular) - Fractures (trauma) - Other (trauma)
Research involving
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
Costs associated with each visit from societal perspective include monetary costs (e.g. parking costs, travel costs), but also loss of productivity, costs associated with loss of productivity from informal caregiver and costs for childcare or an occasional sitter for a (chronically) ill inmate. Healthcare costs include costs such as attending staff costs, video consultation technology costs, direct health service costs etc.
Secondary outcome
- Perceived value toward the consultation - Health status - Patient characteristics
Background summary
Telemedicine in general and video consultations in particular have gained popularity among several clinical departments such as dermatology, orthopedics and surgery. In the light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the need to continue patient care while minimizing the spread of the virus is great. Video consultations provide patients with the opportunity to continue care without having to be physically present. It allows convenient and timely access to qualitative care, while minimizing travel and saving traveling costs. Logically, it is tempting to implement video consultation rapidly in routine care based on the positive experience with it. Nevertheless, evidence on value of medical consultations in general from a patient’s point of view is sparse. Besides, consistent evidence supporting its use from an economic point of view is lacking as well. The primary aim of this study is to analyze costs borne by patients, formal caregivers and the healthcare system for a face-to-face visit and a video consultation in a surgical patient population. Since costs are considered as one of the antecedents of perceived value, the study aims to investigate how often and in which specific situation the consultations are worth the costs incurred as well.
Study objective
We hypothesize that video consultations will be valued equivalent with F2F-visits, with a reduction in associated patient costs and total healthcare costs. In addition to that, we hypothesize that patients consider F2F-visits worth the effort and costs depending on the reason of the visit and their diagnosis. Moreover, we hypothesize that certain patient characteristics are influencing their preference as well.
Study design
Baseline
Intervention
None
Age
Inclusion criteria
- aged 18 years or older; - with a scheduled appointment at the surgical outpatient clinic (GI-oncology surgery, vascular surgery or trauma surgery); - fluent in speaking and reading Dutch; - availability of informed consent.
Exclusion criteria
Patients who have an appointment other than with the surgeon/surgical resident, nurse specialist or physician assistant will be excluded.
Design
Recruitment
IPD sharing statement
p/a Radboudumc, huispost 628,
Postbus 9101
6500 HB Nijmegen
024 361 3154
commissiemensgebondenonderzoek@radboudumc.nl
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
No registrations found.
In other registers
| Register | ID |
|---|---|
| NTR-new | NL8825 |
| Other | CMO Regio Arnhem-Nijmegen : 2020-6671 |