The quality, safety and content of telephone and face-to-face consultations

a comparative study

B McKinstry, V Hammersley, C Burton, H Pinnock, R Elton, J Dowell, N Sawdon, D Heaney, G Elwyn, A Sheikh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

48 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction Telephone consulting is increasingly used to improve access to care and optimise resources for day-time work. However, there remains a debate about how such consultations differ from face-to-face consultations in terms of content quality and/or safety. To investigate this, a comparison of family doctors' telephone and face-to-face consultations was conducted.

Methods 106 audio-recordings (from 19 doctors in nine practices) of telephone and face-to-face consultations, stratified at doctor level, were compared using the Roter Interaction Analysis Scale (RIAS) (content measure), the OPTION (observing patient involvement in decision making scale) and a modified scale based on the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) consultation assessment instrument (measuring quality and safety). Patient satisfaction and enablement were measured using validated instruments. The Roter Interaction Analysis Scale scores were compared by multiple linear regression adjusting for covariates; other continuous measures by ¿2 and Student t tests and binary measures as odds ratios.

Results Telephone consultations were shorter (4.6 vs 9.7 min, p<0.001), presented fewer problems (1.2 vs 1.8, p<0.001) and included less data gathering, counselling/advice and rapport building (all p<0.001) than face-to-face consultations. These differences remained significant when consultation length and number of problems were taken into account. Telephone consultations were judged less likely to include sufficient information to exclude important serious illnesses. Patient involvement and satisfaction outcomes were similar in both consultation types.

Conclusion Although telephone consultations are convenient and judged satisfactory by patients and doctors, they may compromise patient safety more than face-to-face consultations and further research is required to elucidate this. Telephone consultations may be more suited to follow-up and management of long-term conditions than for in-hours acute management.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)298-303
Number of pages6
JournalQuality & safety in health care
Volume19
Issue number4
Early online date29 Apr 2010
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2010

Fingerprint

Telephone
Referral and Consultation
Safety
Patient Participation
Patient Satisfaction
Patient Safety
General Practitioners
Counseling
Linear Models
Decision Making
Odds Ratio
Students

Cite this

The quality, safety and content of telephone and face-to-face consultations : a comparative study. / McKinstry, B; Hammersley, V; Burton, C; Pinnock, H; Elton, R; Dowell, J; Sawdon, N; Heaney, D; Elwyn, G; Sheikh, A.

In: Quality & safety in health care, Vol. 19, No. 4, 08.2010, p. 298-303.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

McKinstry, B, Hammersley, V, Burton, C, Pinnock, H, Elton, R, Dowell, J, Sawdon, N, Heaney, D, Elwyn, G & Sheikh, A 2010, 'The quality, safety and content of telephone and face-to-face consultations: a comparative study', Quality & safety in health care, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 298-303. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2008.027763
McKinstry, B ; Hammersley, V ; Burton, C ; Pinnock, H ; Elton, R ; Dowell, J ; Sawdon, N ; Heaney, D ; Elwyn, G ; Sheikh, A. / The quality, safety and content of telephone and face-to-face consultations : a comparative study. In: Quality & safety in health care. 2010 ; Vol. 19, No. 4. pp. 298-303.
@article{9d35d69cf6304b508c329528188a61b5,
title = "The quality, safety and content of telephone and face-to-face consultations: a comparative study",
abstract = "Introduction Telephone consulting is increasingly used to improve access to care and optimise resources for day-time work. However, there remains a debate about how such consultations differ from face-to-face consultations in terms of content quality and/or safety. To investigate this, a comparison of family doctors' telephone and face-to-face consultations was conducted. Methods 106 audio-recordings (from 19 doctors in nine practices) of telephone and face-to-face consultations, stratified at doctor level, were compared using the Roter Interaction Analysis Scale (RIAS) (content measure), the OPTION (observing patient involvement in decision making scale) and a modified scale based on the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) consultation assessment instrument (measuring quality and safety). Patient satisfaction and enablement were measured using validated instruments. The Roter Interaction Analysis Scale scores were compared by multiple linear regression adjusting for covariates; other continuous measures by ¿2 and Student t tests and binary measures as odds ratios. Results Telephone consultations were shorter (4.6 vs 9.7 min, p<0.001), presented fewer problems (1.2 vs 1.8, p<0.001) and included less data gathering, counselling/advice and rapport building (all p<0.001) than face-to-face consultations. These differences remained significant when consultation length and number of problems were taken into account. Telephone consultations were judged less likely to include sufficient information to exclude important serious illnesses. Patient involvement and satisfaction outcomes were similar in both consultation types. Conclusion Although telephone consultations are convenient and judged satisfactory by patients and doctors, they may compromise patient safety more than face-to-face consultations and further research is required to elucidate this. Telephone consultations may be more suited to follow-up and management of long-term conditions than for in-hours acute management.",
author = "B McKinstry and V Hammersley and C Burton and H Pinnock and R Elton and J Dowell and N Sawdon and D Heaney and G Elwyn and A Sheikh",
year = "2010",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1136/qshc.2008.027763",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "298--303",
journal = "Quality & safety in health care",
issn = "1475-3898",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The quality, safety and content of telephone and face-to-face consultations

T2 - a comparative study

AU - McKinstry, B

AU - Hammersley, V

AU - Burton, C

AU - Pinnock, H

AU - Elton, R

AU - Dowell, J

AU - Sawdon, N

AU - Heaney, D

AU - Elwyn, G

AU - Sheikh, A

PY - 2010/8

Y1 - 2010/8

N2 - Introduction Telephone consulting is increasingly used to improve access to care and optimise resources for day-time work. However, there remains a debate about how such consultations differ from face-to-face consultations in terms of content quality and/or safety. To investigate this, a comparison of family doctors' telephone and face-to-face consultations was conducted. Methods 106 audio-recordings (from 19 doctors in nine practices) of telephone and face-to-face consultations, stratified at doctor level, were compared using the Roter Interaction Analysis Scale (RIAS) (content measure), the OPTION (observing patient involvement in decision making scale) and a modified scale based on the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) consultation assessment instrument (measuring quality and safety). Patient satisfaction and enablement were measured using validated instruments. The Roter Interaction Analysis Scale scores were compared by multiple linear regression adjusting for covariates; other continuous measures by ¿2 and Student t tests and binary measures as odds ratios. Results Telephone consultations were shorter (4.6 vs 9.7 min, p<0.001), presented fewer problems (1.2 vs 1.8, p<0.001) and included less data gathering, counselling/advice and rapport building (all p<0.001) than face-to-face consultations. These differences remained significant when consultation length and number of problems were taken into account. Telephone consultations were judged less likely to include sufficient information to exclude important serious illnesses. Patient involvement and satisfaction outcomes were similar in both consultation types. Conclusion Although telephone consultations are convenient and judged satisfactory by patients and doctors, they may compromise patient safety more than face-to-face consultations and further research is required to elucidate this. Telephone consultations may be more suited to follow-up and management of long-term conditions than for in-hours acute management.

AB - Introduction Telephone consulting is increasingly used to improve access to care and optimise resources for day-time work. However, there remains a debate about how such consultations differ from face-to-face consultations in terms of content quality and/or safety. To investigate this, a comparison of family doctors' telephone and face-to-face consultations was conducted. Methods 106 audio-recordings (from 19 doctors in nine practices) of telephone and face-to-face consultations, stratified at doctor level, were compared using the Roter Interaction Analysis Scale (RIAS) (content measure), the OPTION (observing patient involvement in decision making scale) and a modified scale based on the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) consultation assessment instrument (measuring quality and safety). Patient satisfaction and enablement were measured using validated instruments. The Roter Interaction Analysis Scale scores were compared by multiple linear regression adjusting for covariates; other continuous measures by ¿2 and Student t tests and binary measures as odds ratios. Results Telephone consultations were shorter (4.6 vs 9.7 min, p<0.001), presented fewer problems (1.2 vs 1.8, p<0.001) and included less data gathering, counselling/advice and rapport building (all p<0.001) than face-to-face consultations. These differences remained significant when consultation length and number of problems were taken into account. Telephone consultations were judged less likely to include sufficient information to exclude important serious illnesses. Patient involvement and satisfaction outcomes were similar in both consultation types. Conclusion Although telephone consultations are convenient and judged satisfactory by patients and doctors, they may compromise patient safety more than face-to-face consultations and further research is required to elucidate this. Telephone consultations may be more suited to follow-up and management of long-term conditions than for in-hours acute management.

U2 - 10.1136/qshc.2008.027763

DO - 10.1136/qshc.2008.027763

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 298

EP - 303

JO - Quality & safety in health care

JF - Quality & safety in health care

SN - 1475-3898

IS - 4

ER -