Specialists accessing specialty advice: Evaluating utilization, benefits, and impact of care of an e-consultation service.

INTRODUCTION: The usual referral pathway is from a primary care provider (PCP) to a specialist; however, specialists also refer to and consult with other specialists. Electronic consultation (eConsult) allows clinicians to submit questions on behalf of patients to specialists to receive timely advice. Most eConsult studies in the past have examined questions asked from PCPs to specialists. This study investigates the utilization of specialists submitting clinical questions to other specialists through the Ontario eConsult Service and identifies use-case scenarios where specialist-to-specialist eConsult may be beneficial. METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive, cross-sectional analysis of eConsults submitted by specialists through the Ontario eConsult Service for 24 months (March 2019 to February 2021). Utilization data is collected automatically by the service, including specialty referred to, time billed, region, and results from a closeout survey which includes the referral outcome of the eConsult and the utility to the submitting clinician. RESULTS: 4% (n = 3285) of all eConsults sent within the study period were specialist-to-specialist, with the others being sent by a PCP. The number of specialist-to-specialist eConsults grew 120% following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The top three specialties that submitted eConsults were pediatrics, internal medicine, and endocrinology. The top three specialties that specialists submitted to were dermatology, neurology, and hematology. A face-to-face referral was avoided in 69% of referrals. CONCLUSION: Evaluating the utilization patterns of specialist-to-specialist eConsults allows us to better understand and expand the scope of eConsult services, which have traditionally been thought of as a workflow between a PCP and a specialist.

Improving Access to Osteoporosis Specialists Using Electronic Consultations.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the types of osteoporosis-related questions being asked by primary care providers (PCPs) and describe the impact of the advice provided by osteoporosis specialists using eConsult. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of osteoporosis-related eConsults submitted to endocrinologists between January 2018 and December 2020 on the Champlain eConsult BASE™ Service in Ontario, Canada. Each eConsult was coded according to clinical question and answer type through consensus between 2 authors, based on predetermined taxonomies. We analyzed eConsult utilization data, including response times, PCP satisfaction, and referral outcomes (collected via PCP surveys). RESULTS: Of the 2,528 eConsults sent to endocrinologists during the study period, 408 (16%) were specific to osteoporosis. The most common questions asked by PCPs were regarding whether or not to start treatment (35%), the initial therapy choice (25%), and how often to complete bone mineral density scans (15%). The most common responses from specialists included recommendations for bone mineral density scanning (34%), recommendation to start therapy (24%), and recommendation to treat using a bisphosphonate without the dose specified (23%). The median response interval was 3.1 days. Most cases (84%) were resolved without requiring an in-person referral. Clear advice for a new course of action for PCPs to implement was provided in 54% of cases. CONCLUSION: Osteoporosis eConsults provide timely access to valuable specialist advice while avoiding unnecessary face-to-face clinic visits. We identified commonly recurring osteoporosis questions asked by PCPs, which can be used to inform planning of future continuing professional development events.

Using electronic consultation (eConsult) to identify frailty in provider-to-provider communication: a feasibility and validation study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a complex age-related clinical condition that increases vulnerability to stressors. Early recognition of frailty is challenging. While primary care providers (PCPs) serve as the first point of contact for most older adults, convenient tools for identifying frailty in primary care are lacking. Electronic consultation (eConsult), a platform connecting PCPs to specialists, is a rich source of provider-to-provider communication data. Text-based patient descriptions on eConsult may provide opportunities for earlier identification of frailty. We sought to explore the feasibility and validity of identifying frailty status using eConsult data. METHODS: eConsult cases closed in 2019 and submitted on behalf of long-term care (LTC) residents or community-dwelling older adults were sampled. A list of frailty-related terms was compiled through a review of the literature and consultation with experts. To identify frailty, eConsult text was parsed to measure the frequency of frailty-related terms. Feasibility of this approach was assessed by examining the availability of frailty-related terms in eConsult communication logs, and by asking clinicians to indicate whether they can assess likelihood of frailty by reviewing the cases. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the number of frailty-related terms in cases about LTC residents with those about community-dwelling older adults. Criterion validity was assessed by comparing clinicians' ratings of frailty to the frequency of frailty-related terms. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen LTC and 112 community cases were included. Frailty-related terms identified per case averaged 4.55 ± 3.95 in LTC and 1.96 ± 2.68 in the community (p < .001). Clinicians consistently rated cases with ≥ 5 frailty-related terms as highly likely of living with frailty. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of frailty-related terms establishes the feasibility of using provider-to-provider communication on eConsult to identify patients with high likelihood of living with this condition. The higher average of frailty-related terms in LTC (versus community) cases, and agreement between clinician-provided frailty ratings and the frequency of frailty-related terms, support the validity of an eConsult-based approach to identifying frailty. There is potential for eConsult to be used as a case-finding tool in primary care for early recognition and proactive initiation of care processes for older patients living with frailty.

Implementation of a Web-Based Communication System for Primary Care Providers and Cancer Specialists.

Healthcare providers have reported challenges with coordinating care for patients with cancer. Digital technology tools have brought new possibilities for improving care coordination. A web- and text-based asynchronous system (eOncoNote) was implemented in Ottawa, Canada for cancer specialists and primary care providers (PCPs). This study aimed to examine PCPs' experiences of implementing eOncoNote and how access to the system influenced communication between PCPs and cancer specialists. As part of a larger study, we collected and analyzed system usage data and administered an end-of-discussion survey to understand the perceived value of using eOncoNote. eOncoNote data were analyzed for 76 shared patients (33 patients receiving treatment and 43 patients in the survivorship phase). Thirty-nine percent of the PCPs responded to the cancer specialist's initial eOncoNote message and nearly all of those sent only one message. Forty-five percent of the PCPs completed the survey. Most PCPs reported no additional benefits of using eOncoNote and emphasized the need for electronic medical record (EMR) integration. Over half of the PCPs indicated that eOncoNote could be a helpful service if they had questions about a patient. Future research should examine opportunities for EMR integration and whether additional interventions could support communication between PCPs and cancer specialists.

Web-Based Asynchronous Tool to Facilitate Communication Between Primary Care Providers and Cancer Specialists: Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cancer poses a significant global health burden. With advances in screening and treatment, there are now a growing number of cancer survivors with complex needs, requiring the involvement of multiple health care providers. Previous studies have identified problems related to communication and care coordination between primary care providers (PCPs) and cancer specialists. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine whether a web- and text-based asynchronous system (eOncoNote) could facilitate communication between PCPs and cancer specialists (oncologists and oncology nurses) to improve patient-reported continuity of care among patients receiving treatment or posttreatment survivorship care. METHODS: In this pragmatic randomized controlled trial, a total of 173 patients were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (eOncoNote plus usual methods of communication between PCPs and cancer specialists) or a control group (usual communication only), including 104 (60.1%) patients in the survivorship phase (breast and colorectal cancer) and 69 (39.9%) patients in the treatment phase (breast and prostate cancer). The primary outcome was patient-reported team and cross-boundary continuity (Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire). Secondary outcome measures included the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Screener (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire on Major Depression, and Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire. Patients completed the questionnaires at baseline and at 2 points following randomization. Patients in the treatment phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 1 month and at either 4 months (patients with prostate cancer) or 6 months following randomization (patients with breast cancer). Patients in the survivorship phase completed follow-up questionnaires at 6 months and at 12 months following randomization. RESULTS: The results did not show an intervention effect on the primary outcome of team and cross-boundary continuity of care or on the secondary outcomes of depression and patient experience with their health care. However, there was an intervention effect on anxiety. In the treatment phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score from baseline to the 1-month follow-up for GAD-7 (mean difference -2.3; P=.03). In the survivorship phase, there was a statistically significant difference in the change score for GAD-7 between baseline and the 6-month follow-up (mean difference -1.7; P=.03) and between baseline and the 12-month follow-up (mean difference -2.4; P=.004). CONCLUSIONS: PCPs' and cancer specialists' access to eOncoNote is not significantly associated with patient-reported continuity of care. However, PCPs' and cancer specialists' access to the eOncoNote intervention may be a factor in reducing patient anxiety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03333785; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03333785.

A retrospective analysis of the use of electronic consultation in general internal medicine.

BACKGROUND: General internists in Canada are subspecialty providers in the inpatient and outpatient settings. Electronic consultations (eConsult) allow primary care providers (PCPs) to virtually consult specialists to address clinical questions. There is a paucity of literature examining the utility and benefits of eConsults by general internists. AIMS: To determine how an eConsult service is used to access general internists. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of internal medicine cases was completed between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2019 via the ChamplainBASE eConsult service. Two authors derived and validated a general internal medicine (GIM)-specific taxonomy using the validated: (i) Taxonomy of Generic Clinical Questions; and (ii) Internal Classification for Primary Care. Two hundred seventy-six cases were coded following taxonomy validation. ChamplainBASE utilisation summary and closeout survey data were also analysed. RESULTS: eConsults were responded to in a median of 3.1 days and took 15 min to complete. The eConsult's helpfulness and educational value were rated as 4 to 5/5 and often provided advice for a new or additional course of action. In-person referral was avoided in 40% of cases. The majority of eConsults consisted of a single question (88%) related to diagnostic clarification. The median remuneration per eConsult was $50. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of eConsults to general internists sought diagnostic clarification and confirmed the view of general internists as expert diagnosticians. eConsults cost less than an in-person consultation and were viewed favourably by PCPs. Further research can consider the eConsult provider experience and whether eConsults should become a required part of GIM ambulatory practice.

The effect of eConsult on the provision of orthopaedic services in Nunavut.

To assess the effect of eConsultation in providing Orthopaedic Surgery specialist service to patients in Nunavut. A cross-sectional study of 161 Orthopaedic Surgery consultations received from primary care providers (PCPs) in Nunavut via the Champlain Building Access to Specialist service through eConsult (BASETM) service over the 2-year period from January 2017 to December 2018. Data captured were: reason for consultation, impact of advice on referral, perceived value to the PCPs and time spent. eConsult avoided unnecessary in-person consultation 62% of the time while catching 5% of the referrals that would have otherwise been missed. PCP referral behaviour was modified 48% of the time. 94% of eConsults were rated as valuable to PCPs in their practice and 100% of eConsults resulted in actionable advice. Further, eConsults took an average of 15.4 minutes of specialist time to complete, and the mean time from referral to response was 1.4 days. eConsultation spares unnecessary consultation to Orthopaedic Surgery, catches important referrals that would have otherwise been missed, decreases wait time, and may reduce cost in remote healthcare systems such as Nunavut.

Patient and Healthcare Provider Perspectives on the Implementation of a Web-Based Clinical Communication System for Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Previous research has identified communication and care coordination problems for patients with cancer. Healthcare providers (HCPs) have reported communication issues due to the incompatibility of electronic medical records (EMR) software and not being consistently copied on patient reports. We evaluated an asynchronous web-based communication system ("eOncoNote") for primary care providers and cancer specialists to improve cancer care coordination. The objectives were to examine patients' perceptions of the role of eOncoNote in their healthcare, and HCPs' experiences of implementing eOncoNote. Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients with breast and prostate cancer, primary care providers, and cancer specialists. Eighteen patients and fourteen HCPs participated. Six themes were identified from the patient interviews focusing on HCP and patient roles related to care coordination and patient awareness of communication among their HCPs. Four themes were identified from HCP interviews related to the context of care coordination and experience with eOncoNote. Both patients and HCPs described the important role patients and caregivers play in care coordination. The results show that patients were often unaware of the communication between their HCPs and assumed they were communicating. HCPs encountered challenges incorporating eOncoNote into their workflow.

Benefits of Providing Feedback and Utilisation Metrics to Specialists on Their Participation in eConsult.

Our study evaluates the impact of feedback sent to specialists participating in eConsult services. eConsult Specialists from two eConsult services in Ontario, Canada, received feedback on their use of eConsult via bi-annual specialist reports. An 11-item survey was developed to evaluate the impact, content, and distribution process of these specialist reports. We distributed 742 specialist reports in March 2021 and surveyed the specialists in July 2021. Our findings show that specialists largely felt that the feedback received validated their efforts (83%) and that receiving the report made them more likely to continue to participate in the eConsult service (59%). Most did not feel judged (74%) or distressed (79%) by the reports, and 72% said that reporting the median self-reported billing time did not impact their own billing times. Overall, eConsult services can capture, report and aggregate data valuable to specialists and is useful for Continuing Professional Development. Benefits and lack of risk implementing this type of feedback should encourage other services to consider similar processes.

Use of eConsult to enhance genetics service delivery in primary care: A multimethod study.

PURPOSE: Electronic consultation (eConsult) is a freely-available secure online platform connecting primary care providers (PCPs) to geneticists. Our purpose was to determine whether eConsult is effective in improving genetics service delivery in primary care. METHODS: PCP questionnaires regarding eConsult's utility, geneticists' tracking form assessments of eConsult type and appropriateness, and geneticists' interviews on implementing eConsult were carried out. RESULTS: In 2 regions of Ontario, Canada, from January 2019 to June 2020, there were 305 genetics eConsults. For 169 (55%), PCPs indicated receiving good advice for a new course of action; for 110 (36%), referral was now avoided; and for 261 (86%), eConsult was perceived valuable for patient management. Of the 131 geneticist-completed tracking forms, cancer questions were most common (68, 52%). For 63 (48%), geneticists disagreed/strongly disagreed PCPs should know the answer to the referral question. From the interview data, it was observed that geneticists described eConsult positively and suggested how it might improve access and efficiencies if integrated into genetic service delivery. Dealing with eConsults virtually could reduce waitlists, and suggesting appropriate investigations for PCPs could improve efficiencies. CONCLUSION: eConsult offers a potential solution for receiving timely genetics advice and avoiding unnecessary patient referrals, however, greater effect on access and wait times will need systematic integration into PCP and geneticist practice.

The Ontario Electronic Consultation (eConsult) Service: Cross-sectional Analysis of Utilization Data for 2 Models.

BACKGROUND: The Ontario electronic consultation (eConsult) service allows a primary care provider (PCP) to access specialist advice through 2 models: the direct-to-specialist (DTS) model, where PCPs select a specialist from a directory, and the Building Access to Specialists Through eConsultation (BASE)-managed specialty service, where PCPs choose a specialty group and are assigned a specialist from a qualified pool based on availability. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to examine patterns of use between the 2 models of eConsult delivery. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of utilization data collected from eConsults completed between October 2018 and September 2019. Cases were grouped based on the model used for submission (ie, BASE or DTS). Each model was assessed for the number of cases over time, specialty distribution, proportion resulting in new or additional information, impact on PCPs' decisions to refer, and billing time. RESULTS: PCPs submitted 26,121 eConsults during the study period. The monthly case volume increased by 43% over the duration of the study, primarily in the BASE model (66% compared to 6% for DTS). PCPs were able to confirm a course of action that they originally had in mind in 41.4% (6373/15,376) of BASE cases and 41.3% (3363/8136) of DTS cases and received advice for a new or additional course of action in 54.7% (8418/15,376) of BASE cases and 56.3% (4582/8136) of DTS cases. A referral was originally contemplated but avoided in 51.3% (7887/15,376) of BASE cases and 53.3% (4336/8136) of DTS cases, originally contemplated and still needed in 19.4% (2986/15,376) of BASE cases and 17.7% (1438/8136) of DTS cases, and neither originally contemplated nor needed in 21.7% (3334/15,376) of BASE cases and 21.9% (1781/8136) of DTS cases. CONCLUSIONS: Both eConsult models had strong uptake. Use patterns varied between models, with the majority of growth occurring under BASE, but survey responses showed that both models provided similar outcomes in terms of new information offered and impact on decision to refer.

Teledermatology Utilization and Integration in Residency Training Over the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the 2019 Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, the Division of Dermatology, University of Ottawa, adapted pre-existing local healthcare infrastructures to provide increased provider-to-provider teledermatology services as well as integrated teledermatology into the dermatology residency training program. OBJECTIVES: (1) To assess the differences in utilization of provider-to-provider teledermatology services before and during the COVID-19 pandemic; and (2) to assess dermatology resident and faculty experiences with the integration of teledermatology into dermatology residency training at the University of Ottawa. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis comparing provider-to-provider teledermatology consults submitted to dermatologists from April 2019 to October 2019 pre-pandemic with the same period during the pandemic in 2020. Two different questionnaires were also disseminated to the dermatology residents and faculty at our institution inquiring about their perspectives on teledermatology, education, and practice. RESULTS: The number of dermatologists completing consults, the number of providers submitting a case to Dermatology, and the number of consults initiated all increased during the pandemic period. Ninety-one percent of residents agreed that eConsults and teledermatology enhanced their residency education, enabled continuation of training during the pandemic, and that eConsult-based training should be incorporated into the curriculum. Ninety-six percent of staff incorporated a virtual dermatology practice model, and one-third used teledermatology with residents during the pandemic. Most staff felt there was value in providing virtual visits in some capacity during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that the use of teledermatology services continues to increase accessibility during the pandemic. Teledermatology enhances the education and training of residents and will be incorporated into dermatology residency programs.

Cancer specialist perspectives on implementing an online communication system with primary care providers.

Context: The Canadian Team to Improve Community-Based Cancer Care along the Continuum (CanIMPACT) is a group of researchers, primary care providers (PCPs), cancer specialists, patients and caregivers working to improve cancer care coordination between PCPs and cancer specialists. Previous research by CanIMPACT and others has identified problems related to communication, coordination, and continuity of care. Objective: Describe findings from qualitative interviews with cancer specialists on implementation of an online communication system with PCPs. Study Design: Hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation study that included a qualitative research component and a pragmatic RCT. Setting: Ottawa Hospital Cancer Program and primary care practices in the Champlain region. Population Studied: Cancer specialists (nurses, medical and radiation oncologists, program administrators). Interviews conducted with 12 cancer specialists. Intervention: Cancer-specific adaptation of Champlain BASE™ eConsult, an online communication system for PCPs and cancer specialists called "eOncoNote". For patients receiving treatment for prostate or breast cancer, cancer specialists had an opportunity to participate in eOncoNote discussion with PCP for 4-6 months; for breast and colorectal cancer survivors, the eOncoNote discussion lasted for 1 year post discharge to the patient's PCP. Results: Cancer specialists described limited PCP involvement in cancer care while patients received active treatment, with one-way communication and notes being "sent into a vacuum". There was more communication with PCPs regarding patients with metastatic disease, comorbid conditions, after patients have completed treatment, or during palliative care. Patients and caregivers play a critical role in coordinating cancer care, helping to facilitate coordination. Lack of access to the same electronic medical record (EMR) among healthcare providers poses a barrier to cancer care coordination. eOncoNote had the potential to be useful tool but it was not used extensively. Conclusions: Accessing eOncoNote as a separate system was challenging to incorporate into the workflow, and cancer specialists highlighted the need for integration with their EMR. eOncoNote did not affect information sharing with PCPs, as there was limited uptake within primary care.

Improving primary care access to respirologists using eConsult.

BACKGROUND: Patients and primary care providers (PCPs) can experience frustration about poor access to specialist care. The Champlain Building Access to Specialists through eConsultation (BASETM) is a secure online platform that allows PCPs to ask a clinical question to 142 different specialty groups. The specialist is expected to respond within 7 days. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of the Champlain BASETM respirology eConsults from January 2017 to December 2018. The eConsults were categorized by types of questions asked by the referring provider and by the clinical content of the referral. Specialists' response time and time spent answering the clinical question were analyzed. Referring providers' close-out surveys were reviewed to assess the impact of the respirology eConsult service on traditional referral rates and clinical course of action. RESULTS: Of the 26 679 cases submitted to the Champlain BASE TM eConsult service, 268 were respirology cases (1%). 91% were sent by family physicians and 9% by nurse practitioners. The median time to respond by specialists was 0.8 days, and the median time billed by specialists was 20 min. The most common topics were pulmonary nodules and masses (16.4%), cough (10.4%), infective problems (8.6%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (8.6%) and dyspnea Not Yet Diagnosed (NYD) (7.8%). The most common types of questions asked by PCP were related to investigations warranted (43.1% of cases), general management (17.5%), monitoring (12.6%), need for a respirology referral (12.3%) and drug of choice (6.3%). In 23% of cases, the PCP indicated they were planning to refer the patient for an in-person consultation but no longer needed to after receiving the eConsult advice (avoided referrals). On the other hand, in 13% of cases, the PCP was not going to refer but did after the eConsult (prompted referrals). The eConsult led to a new or additional clinical course of action by the PCP in 49% of cases. In 51% of cases, the PCP suggested the clinical topic would be well suited to a CME event. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in eConsult services can improve timely access to respirologists while potentially avoiding clinic visits and significantly impacting referring PCPs clinical course of action. Using the most common clinical topics and types of questions for CME planning should be considered. Future research may include a cost analysis and provider perspectives on the role of eConsult in respirology care.

Pathology perspective on gynaecologic malignancy screening questions in electronic consultation.

INTRODUCTION: The electronic consultation service, eConsult, is an asynchronous web-based platform for provider-to-provider consultation with specialists. This study described the utilization of eConsult by primary care providers to obtain specialist opinion in gynaecologic malignancy screening, with a specific focus on pathology-related inquiries. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional retrospective review of eConsults submitted to obstetrics/gynaecology between September 2011 and December 2016. All questions pertaining to gynaecologic cancer screening and their pathologies were included. Each question was classified based on a pre-determined taxonomy. The mandatory primary care providers' exit surveys were analysed to determine eConsult's influence on patient care, primary care providers' referral patterns, primary care providers' satisfaction and educational value. RESULTS: In total, 1,357 electronic consultations were submitted to the obstetrics and gynaecology service during the study period, of which 329 met inclusion criteria. Indications for a screening test based on patient risk factors made up 36% of consults pertaining to gynaecologic malignancy screening and 17% were inquiries about test intervals based on previous results. Primary care providers pointed out gaps in current screening guidelines. In total, 38% of primary care providers reported the eConsult service helped avoid a specialist referral, whereas 47% of primary care providers received new or additional courses of action. Pathology report interpretation accounted for 5% of eConsults and 6% of primary care providers wished for clarification of incidental pathology findings. CONCLUSION: This study uncovered areas of uncertainty among primary care providers regarding gynaecologic cancer screening and gaps in current clinical guidelines. Furthermore, the role of pathology consultants in an eConsult platform is explored and may be extrapolated into practice.

Electronic Consultation Between Primary Care Providers and Radiologists.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to assess the use of an electronic consultation platform to connect primary care providers and radiologists and provide opportunities for valuable consultation regarding diagnostic imaging in patients, as well as to identify opportunities for targeted education surrounding high-yield radiology topics. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A retrospective review was performed of consultations conducted using the electronic platform from September 2012 to January 2017. Consultations were classified by subspecialty (neuroradiology, thoracic, abdominal, musculoskeletal, or pediatric radiology), question type (workup, surveillance, education, specialist referral query, discharge, or other), anatomy, and pathology. Feedback surveys were completed by primary care providers after each consultation to evaluate timeliness, value, and impact on patient care. RESULTS. A total of 302 consultations were reviewed. Subspecialty breakdown was as follows: abdominal, 94/302 (31%); neuroradiology, 74/302 (25%); musculoskeletal, 61/302 (20%); thoracic, 56/302 (19%); and pediatric, 17/302 (6%). The majority of consultations pertained to patient workup (112/302 [37%]), surveillance of imaging findings (95/302 [31%]), and provider education (48/302 [16%]). Cystic lesions (38/302 [13%]), pain (24/302 [8%]), and bone lesions (21/302 [7%]) were the most queried conditions. Patient management was altered in 167 cases (55%), and unnecessary testing was avoided in 84 (28%). Providers rated the perceived value of the electronic consultation system as excellent in 227 cases (75%). CONCLUSION. The electronic consultation system allowed primary care providers to easily consult with radiologists, was perceived as high value by primary care providers, resulted in altered patient management, and avoided unnecessary imaging tests. We identified follow-up imaging of cystic lesions and imaging workup of pain in patients as opportunities for continuing medical education for primary care providers.

The Feasibility of Using Electronic Consultation in Long-Term Care Homes.

Patients in long-term care (LTC) homes face barriers to accessing specialist advice. Electronic consultation (eConsult) has the potential to improve access for these patients. We used a multi-method approach to evaluate adoption of the Champlain BASE eConsult service in LTC homes across Eastern Ontario, Canada. We conducted a cross-sectional study of all eConsults submitted by primary care providers (PCPs) working at LTC homes between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018. Service use data were collected and descriptive statistics were calculated. We completed a thematic analysis of 4 focus groups with PCPs, senior leadership, and a nurse champion working in LTC homes where eConsult is used. Sixty-four cases were submitted to 23 specialty and subspecialty groups by LTC PCPs, most frequently dermatology (19%), geriatric medicine (11%), and infectious disease (9%). Specialists responded in a median of 0.6 days, and 70% of cases were resolved without the resident needing a face-to-face specialist visit. In 60% of cases, PCPs received advice for a new or additional course of action. Participants described complexities in the LTC context, the value of eConsult in LTC, and considerations for implementation. PCPs with experience using the service described increased access to specialist advice, ease of use, and benefits to themselves, residents, and families. eConsult is feasible in LTC and should continue to be used in this region and beyond to improve equity of access to specialist advice. Resolving the identified limitations in LTC, which hinder access to specialists and adoption of eConsult and similar innovations, should be of high priority to researchers and policy makers.

Insights into Specialists' Participation and Self-Reported Billing Times in a Multispecialty eConsult Service: Correlating Response Length with Outcomes and Satisfaction.

Background: Electronic consultation (eConsult) services have been shown to reduce the need for face-to-face consultations. The largest expense is remunerating the specialist. Introduction: The Champlain BASE™ eConsult service remunerates specialists based on their self-reported billing time. It is important for funders of eConsult systems to understand and plan for specialist remuneration. This study examined specialists' time commitments pertaining to eConsult, identified factors that affect their self-reported billing time, and determined if self-reported billing time is associated with changes in primary care provider (PCP) behavior. Methods: A cross-sectional study of eConsults was completed between January 1 and December 31, 2017. Data were collected automatically by the service and through mandatory closeout surveys. Logistic regressions identified associations between specialists' self-reported billing time and volume of cases completed, PCP characteristics, specialty group, impact on PCP behaviors, and PCP satisfaction. Results: A total of 11,985 cases met inclusion criteria. Self-reported billing time was <5 min in 18.3% of cases, 5-10 min in 35.6%, 10-15 min in 27.3%, 15-20 min in 11.3%, and >20 min in 7.5%. Self-reported billing time demonstrated significant variation between specialty groups. Cases with higher self-reported billing time were more likely to lead to new/additional course of action for PCPs (p ≤ 0.0001), resulted in fewer referrals (p ≤ 0.0001), and received higher rankings for helpfulness and educational value (p ≤ 0.0001). Discussion: A thorough understanding of when and how specialists respond to eConsult cases is critical to ensuring the service's long-term sustainability. Examining these factors and their impact on PCP behaviors helps us to better understand the service's overall value and serve to inform the structure of its remuneration process. Conclusions: Specialists' self-reported billing time varies by specialty group and is associated with changes in PCP behavior and satisfaction. Further research is needed to identify what factors influence self-reported billing time and how eConsult can be best incorporated into clinicians' workflows.

Effective Integration of an eConsult Service into an Existing Referral Workflow Within a Primary Care Clinic.

Background: When implementing e-health solutions, effective integration into a clinic's existing processes is essential to facilitate adoption and sustained usage. Introduction: This article examines the effectiveness of adoption/utilization of an electronic consultation (eConsult) service by primary care providers (PCPs) using a "delegate model," through which referral clerks manage requests on behalf of PCPs, thereby reducing PCPs' administrative burden. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study of all eConsults submitted between May 1, 2013, and December 31, 2017, by the Bruyère Academic Family Health Team (FHT), after the clinic implemented the service using a delegate model. We assessed system utilization, including monthly volume of submitted eConsults, requested specialties, and impact on PCP referral behavior based on the mandatory closeout surveys. We also conducted a subanalysis to compare the volumes of eConsults per provider between the FHT and all other providers. Results: The Bruyère Academic FHT submitted 3,233 eConsult cases. Volume increased 3.5 fold, from 285 in the first year to 1,016 in the last year. Active Bruyère Academic FHT providers (those who submitted ≥3 cases in 6 months) submitted a median of 25 eConsults (interquartile range [IQR]: 14.75-35.25) versus 14 (IQR 8-24) for all other active users. In 36% of cases, a referral was originally contemplated but avoided based on specialist advice. In 5% of cases, the referral was not originally contemplated but deemed appropriate by the PCP based on specialist advice. Discussion: Our findings show high levels of eConsult use in the clinic utilizing a delegate model, which persisted throughout the study period and was reported to significantly reduce the backlog of traditional referrals at the clinic. Conclusions: The integration of eConsult capability into existing clinic operations was successful in that it allowed the PCPs to request eConsult using a familiar process, avoiding the challenges associated with adopting a new and unfamiliar technology.