ABSTRACT
AimsSince March 2020 most General Paediatric Outpatient appointments have been carried out by telephone due to COVID-19 restrictions. This study explored families’ views and satisfaction with remote consultations for new patient appointments.MethodsFrom March to June 2021, all families whose child received a telephone appointment for a new clinical problem were invited to complete an online structured questionnaire with 17 questions containing rating scales, or yes/no answers. Questions related to ease of communication, preferences about type of Outpatient appointment, and overall satisfaction. There was a free-text box for additional comments. All families were contacted about the questionnaire through an attachment with the appointment letter and a follow-up text message or email. A third point of contact in the form of a phonecall was attempted for families with appointments in May or June. All new appointments were 30 minutes long and conducted by a group of 25 Consultant Paediatricians.ResultsOf 1209 outpatient appointments, 221 families (18.3%) completed the questionnaire. Regarding communication: 210 (95%) reported there was sufficient time in the appointment and, out of a score of 10, Ease of communication was rated 8.34, Listening skills of the Consultant 9.15 and Clarity of management plan 8.57. 48 patients (21.7%) were discharged after the consultation, and in total 102 patients (46.2%) were not assessed to require a follow-up face-to-face appointment (FTF).Exploring preferences, 103 families (46.6%) thought that a FTF would have been better than a telephone appointment (TP), 92 (41.6%) were happy with a phone appointment, and 26 (11.8%) were unsure. However, 171 families (77.4%) would be happy to have a TP again for a new problem. Around one third considered a video appointment would be preferable to a TP (77 families, 34.8%) and 90 families (40.7%) felt that a video appointment would be as good or worse, 54 families (24.5%) were unsure.Relating to overall satisfaction, carers gave a satisfaction rating of 8.71/10, and the 59 children (26.7%) who were able to take part in the TP 7.78/10. 128 families (57.9%) provided additional comments, most were positive comments about the appointment and preferences for a FTF in future. Negative comments mainly related to difficulty in communication (13), the management plan (8) or administration issues (8).ConclusionDespite a significant shift in the delivery of Outpatient services, families felt they were listened to, had time to talk about their concerns, and were clear about management plans. Overall, they were satisfied with the consultations, although almost half would have preferred a FTF. Many families did not complete the questionnaire, and this non-response bias must be considered in the interpretation of results. However, there were no official complaints about TPs during this period.Going forward, there is a role for TPs, particularly for certain conditions which can be well described, and if the child has been examined recently in Primary Care. TPs reduce transport costs and travel time for families, and have a major impact on the carbon footprint of Outpatient services.