Initial Results and Patient Survey of Virtual Inpatient Ophthalmology Consultations During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

ABSTRACT Purpose: To examine the uptake, results, and patient assessment of virtual inpatient ophthalmology consultations at our academic medical center during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: Retrospective review, pre and post COVID analysis, and teleophthalmology patient survey in the inpatient and emergency setting. Participants: Adult patients at our medical center for whom ophthalmology consultation was requested from February 24 through April 19, 2020. Methods: Patient encounters were retrieved and coded for all inpatient and emergency room ophthalmology consultations over a 4-week period before and a 4-week period after our department first offered virtual ophthalmology consultations. Theseconsultations took place over real-time video, audio, or photography between the on-call ophthalmologist and the patient and/or patient's primary physician. A four-item questionnaire was offered to patients who completed a virtual consultation. Main Outcome Measures: Virtual consultation diagnoses and management outcomes; patient assessment of virtual inpatient and emergent ophthalmic care. Results: Of all 423 included encounters, 258 (61%) occurred during the 4 weeks before offering virtual consultations and 165 (39%) encounters occurred during the subsequent 4-week period, indicating a 36% decrease in ophthalmology consultations over this pandemic period. A total of 120 (28%) encounters were conducted remotely during the 8-week period. In-person emergency department (ED) encounters (as percent of total encounters) decreased from 60% to 36% (p < .01) between the first and eighth weeks of the study period. In the 4 weeks since their implementation, virtual inpatient ophthalmology consultations were utilized in 34 of 165 (21%) consultations. Of those, 20 (59%) were high acuity and 1 (3%) was escalated to the ED for in-person evaluation. Most common management decisions made included medication prescription in 46 (55%) patients and scheduling follow-up for 44 (30%) patients. In a survey administered to all 120 patients who were managed over phone or video, 56 (47%) responded. Respondents were in general agreement (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92) and expressed satisfaction with phone and virtual encounters. Specifically, 42 (49%) of 86 patients who had phone encounters noted a mean weighted satisfaction score of 4.6 out of 5 and 14 (41%) responders of 34 virtual consultation encounters noted a mean weighted satisfaction score of 4.9 out of 5. The difference between the average weighted satisfaction scores favored virtual consultation over telephone encounters (p < .01). Conclusions: Virtual inpatient ophthalmology consultations are feasible and have reported high patient satisfaction. Implementing video-based technologies to deliver high-acuity ophthalmic triage and management may help to promote patient and provider safety. In our experience, patients favored virtual consultation over telephone encounters.