PURPOSE: Our oculoplastic service piloted a new video consultation (VC) clinic in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected to determine whether specific patients are better suited to VC, and to quantify the true benefit of VC in patients that successfully attended. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on predetermined data collection forms, including consultation duration, diagnosis, management plan, and issues that arose. RESULTS: 37.8% of new referrals and 60.9% of return patients were vetted as suitable for VC. Of those invited to attend, 83.4% agreed to a VC appointment. Of the patients appointed to a VC clinic, 71.7% (new)/75% (return) successfully completed VC, 14.9%/15.8% attempted a VC which ultimately failed, and 13.4%/9.2% did not attend. VC successfully prevented face-to-face consultation in 81.3% of new cases and 91.1% of returns. Ectropion, entropion and dermatochalasis (new referrals), and postoperative follow-up (return patients) were well suited to VC, while patients with "watery eye" (new), and lid or conjunctival lesions (return), often required face-to-face consultation. Problems (most common issues with patients connecting to the consultation, video quality, and audio quality) were encountered during 50.3% of calls, although 82.6% of attempted calls were ultimately successful. Age was not associated with the proportion of calls that were successful. CONCLUSIONS: VC is a useful tool for oculoplastic patients, irrespective of age, as long as the patient's notes/referrals are carefully vetted to determine suitability. Patients with ectropion, entropion and dermatochalasis, and postoperative reviews are better suited to VC than those with "watery eye," lid lesions, and conjunctival lesions.
PURPOSE: Our oculoplastic service piloted a new video consultation (VC) clinic in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected to determine whether specific patients are better suited to VC, and to quantify the true benefit of VC in patients that successfully attended. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on predetermined data collection forms, including consultation duration, diagnosis, management plan, and issues that arose. RESULTS: 37.8% of new referrals and 60.9% of return patients were vetted as suitable for VC. Of those invited to attend, 83.4% agreed to a VC appointment. Of the patients appointed to a VC clinic, 71.7% (new)/75% (return) successfully completed VC, 14.9%/15.8% attempted a VC which ultimately failed, and 13.4%/9.2% did not attend. VC successfully prevented face-to-face consultation in 81.3% of new cases and 91.1% of returns. Ectropion, entropion and dermatochalasis (new referrals), and postoperative follow-up (return patients) were well suited to VC, while patients with "watery eye" (new), and lid or conjunctival lesions (return), often required face-to-face consultation. Problems (most common issues with patients connecting to the consultation, video quality, and audio quality) were encountered during 50.3% of calls, although 82.6% of attempted calls were ultimately successful. Age was not associated with the proportion of calls that were successful. CONCLUSIONS: VC is a useful tool for oculoplastic patients, irrespective of age, as long as the patient's notes/referrals are carefully vetted to determine suitability. Patients with ectropion, entropion and dermatochalasis, and postoperative reviews are better suited to VC than those with "watery eye," lid lesions, and conjunctival lesions.
Authors: Carolina C S Valentim; Justin C Muste; Amogh I Iyer; Michael A Krause; Aneesha Kalur; Steve W Gendi; Marc Ohlhausen; Aleksandra Rachitskaya; Rishi P Singh; Katherine E Talcott Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 3.775