The impact of a virtual cardiology outpatient clinic in the COVID-19 era.

Abstract

BackgroundRestrictions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic have demanded an innovative approach to provide appropriate patient review. We have been running virtual cardiology clinics as per Health Service Executive guidance.AimsOur study aims to determine how virtual clinics change practice vs traditional clinics.MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients attending cardiology clinics in our hospital from 6 January to 13 March 2020 (‘traditional clinic’, n = 1644), compared with clinics during the COVID-19 outbreak, from 16 March to 22 April 2020 (‘virtual clinic’, n = 691), with the same medical staff.ResultsThere was no difference in age (61 vs 60), case mix or new vs return appointments in virtual vs traditional clinics. There were similar rates of clinic participation, 71.8% vs 74.2%. A lower proportion of investigations (e.g. imaging) were booked in virtual (38.5%) vs traditional (55.7%) clinics, p < 0.00001. Management changes (e.g. medication changes) were less frequent in virtual (19.9%) vs traditional (38.5%) clinics, p < 0.00001. However, the discharge rate was higher in virtual (28.8%) vs traditional (19.5%) clinics, p = 0.00003.ConclusionThis study highlights that virtual clinic consultations are associated with fewer investigations, fewer management changes, and increased discharge rates compared with traditional consultations. These practice changes would reduce costs and hospital outpatient congestion by avoiding unnecessary hospital reviews. Nonetheless, it is unknown whether patients requiring face-to-face consultations could be missed as a result of this virtual approach. Longitudinal studies are required to assess clinical outcomes as a result of these practice changes and whether patient satisfaction is altered.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11845-021-02617-z.