What is the patient acceptability of real time 1:1 videoconferencing in an orthopaedics setting? A systematic review

Gilbert, Anthony W., Jaggi, Anju and May, Carl R. (2017) What is the patient acceptability of real time 1:1 videoconferencing in an orthopaedics setting? A systematic review. Physiotherapy (United Kingdom). (doi:10.1016/j.physio.2017.11.217).

Abstract

Background: Real time 1:1 videoconferencing (VC) has the potential to play an important role in the management of orthopaedic pathologies. Despite positive reporting of telemedicine studies uptake in clinical practice remains low. Acceptability to patients is an important element of system take-up in telemedicine and a focus towards qualitative methodology may explore the underlying reasons behind its acceptability. In this paper we have systematically reviewed qualitative studies that include evidence about patient responses to VC services in an orthopaedic setting. Objectives: To determine whether real time 1:1 videoconferencing is acceptable to patients in an orthopaedic setting. Data sources: MEDLINE, AMED, PsychINFO, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane Database, Evidence Search and Open Grey were searched with forwards and backwards reference screening of eligible papers. Eligibility criteria: Qualitative studies exploring the acceptability of VC in an orthopaedic setting were included. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Studies were appraised using the CASP tool. A Directed Content Framework Analysis was conducted using Normalisation Process Theory. Results: Four studies were included for review. The themes for the four studies did not overlap and did not report clinician acceptability of VC. The Directed Content Analysis of these papers using Normalisation Process Theory highlighted factors which contribute towards its acceptability. Conclusions: All studies concluded that the use of VC was acceptable. Further qualitative research exploring both patient and clinician acceptability is required utilising a theoretical framework to allow for repeatability and generalisability. Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO CRD42015024944.

This record has no associated files available for download.

Contributors

Author: Carl R. May

Download statistics