BACKGROUND: Patients increasingly use the Internet for communication as well as to obtain information, but there are few published reports on either the utilization or effectiveness of email as a means of communication between patient and surgeon. The aim of the present study is to examine the effectiveness of email communication by patients prior to undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 306 patients undergoing thyroid or parathyroid surgery at a tertiary referral centre who had been provided with an information sheet promoting email communication compared to 352 patients in a control group who had not been provided with the same information. RESULTS: In the study group 50 of 306 patients (16%) utilized email communication. There was a statistically significant difference (P = 0.0004) in the age distribution between those who did (mean: 46.2, 95% confidence interval (CI): 42.0-50.4) and those who did not (mean: 54.6, 95%CI: 52.7-56.4) utilize emails, with the email users representing a younger population. In the control group, only 10 of 352 (3%) used email, a significantly lower percentage (P = 0.0001) than in the study group. A total of 101 emails were sent by 50 patients in the study group. Of these, the majority did so only once (n = 28-56%), with one patient sending seven separate emails. Most emails sent focused on only one issue, but some patients raised multiple issues with the most being seven issues in a single email. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns about potential medicolegal issues and other disadvantages, routine email communication between physician and patient provides an effective means of communication for patients undergoing elective surgery.
BACKGROUND:Patients increasingly use the Internet for communication as well as to obtain information, but there are few published reports on either the utilization or effectiveness of email as a means of communication between patient and surgeon. The aim of the present study is to examine the effectiveness of email communication by patients prior to undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 306 patients undergoing thyroid or parathyroid surgery at a tertiary referral centre who had been provided with an information sheet promoting email communication compared to 352 patients in a control group who had not been provided with the same information. RESULTS: In the study group 50 of 306 patients (16%) utilized email communication. There was a statistically significant difference (P = 0.0004) in the age distribution between those who did (mean: 46.2, 95% confidence interval (CI): 42.0-50.4) and those who did not (mean: 54.6, 95%CI: 52.7-56.4) utilize emails, with the email users representing a younger population. In the control group, only 10 of 352 (3%) used email, a significantly lower percentage (P = 0.0001) than in the study group. A total of 101 emails were sent by 50 patients in the study group. Of these, the majority did so only once (n = 28-56%), with one patient sending seven separate emails. Most emails sent focused on only one issue, but some patients raised multiple issues with the most being seven issues in a single email. CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns about potential medicolegal issues and other disadvantages, routine email communication between physician and patient provides an effective means of communication for patients undergoing elective surgery.