Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Palliative medicine video consultations in the pandemic: patient feedback
  1. Anna Elizabeth Sutherland1,
  2. Victoria Bradley1,
  3. Mary Walding1,
  4. Jane Stickland1 and
  5. Bee Wee2
  1. 1Palliative Medicine, Sir Michael Sobell House Hospice, Oxford, UK
  2. 2Palliative Medicine, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Anna Elizabeth Sutherland, Palliative Medicine, Sir Michael Sobell House Hospice, Oxford, UK; annasutherland{at}doctors.org.uk

Statistics from Altmetric.com

To the Editor

In March 2020 we published a rapid review of the use of video consultations in palliative care during the COVID-19 pandemic.1 We suggested that although video consultation cannot fully replace face-to-face encounters it could radically reduce the need for them and offer an effective, accessible, acceptable and cost-effective alternative. We now report patient feedback on our video consultation use in a palliative care service, both the value and the challenges in an adult community service.

From May to December 2020 we conducted 170 virtual consultations between patients and members of the Community Palliative Care Team based at Sobell House, Oxford using Attend Anywhere software. A range of professionals were involved, including doctors (24 consultations), occupational therapists and physiotherapists (54 consultations), specialist nurses (29 consultations) and lymphoedema practitioners (63 consultations). Patients ranged in age from 18 to over 65s, with nearly half (48%) in the latter age band.

Feedback was sought routinely from all patients via a short SurveyMonkey form that appeared at the end of the consultation, when the consultation window closed, to enable continuous service evaluation …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors VB retrieved and analysed the data and prepared the draft manuscript. AES collated author comments and prepared the final manuscript. AES, VB, MW, JS and BW all contributed to the final article. VB and BW had supervising author input throughout the drafting of the final manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.