Title |
Principles of a paediatric palliative care consultation can be achieved with home telemedicine
|
---|---|
Published in |
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, November 2014
|
DOI | 10.1177/1357633x14552370 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Natalie K Bradford, Nigel R Armfield, Jeanine Young, Anthony Herbert, Christine Mott, Anthony C Smith |
Abstract |
We compared the records of paediatric palliative consultations undertaken face-to-face, with telemedicine consultations undertaken in patients' homes. A convenience sample of consecutive paediatric palliative care patients was identified from the hospital's palliative care database. A total of 100 consultations was reviewed (50 telemedicine consultations during home visits and 50 face-to-face consultations) according to 14 established principles and components of a paediatric palliative care consultation. In the telemedicine group there was a higher proportion of patients in a stable condition (58% vs 7%), and a lower proportion of patients in terminal phase (2% vs 17%). Discussion about pain and anorexia were significantly more common in the telemedicine group. Discussion about follow up was significantly more common in the telemedicine group (86% vs 56%), whilst resuscitation planning was more common in deteriorating patients receiving inpatient care. All other components and principles of a palliative care consultation were documented equally regardless of method of consultation. The findings confirm that palliative consultations via telemedicine are just as effective as face-to-face consultations in terms of the documented components of the consultation. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 20% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 67 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 12 | 18% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 12% |
Student > Bachelor | 8 | 12% |
Researcher | 6 | 9% |
Other | 6 | 9% |
Other | 14 | 21% |
Unknown | 13 | 19% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 34% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 24% |
Psychology | 4 | 6% |
Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
Other | 5 | 7% |
Unknown | 14 | 21% |