From: Assessing patient safety in a pediatric telemedicine setting: a multi-methods study
Variable | Description | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary Decision (n = 339) | 1. Referred to the ED: 96 consultations (28.3%) | 2. Not referred to the ED: 243 consultations (71.7%) | ||
Secondary Decisionb (n = 243) | 1. Wait & see: – Observe the child and visit the community physician the following day: 181 (74.5%) consultations. | 2. Active decisions:e Intervention: 30 (12.5%) consultations (such as sending a digital prescription to the parents.) Further inquiry: 32 (13%) consultations (using a video, sending photos, visiting the community medical service, arranging an additional conversation, or providing a referral to the ED in case symptoms worsen.) | ||
Diagnosis Appropriateness | 1. In 334 (98.5%) of the cases, the diagnoses were considered appropriate by the two reviewer doctors. | 2. In 5 (1.5%) of the cases, the diagnoses were considered inappropriate by the two reviewing doctors. | ||
Decision Reasonableness | First stagec | In 310 of the consultations, the physicians’ decisions were considered reasonable by the two reviewer doctors. | In 17 consultations, the two reviewer doctors agreed that the decisions were unreasonable. | In only 12 cases, one reviewer deemed the decision unreasonable, but the other did not. |
Second staged | In 312 (92%) of the consultations, the physicians’ decisions were considered reasonable by the two reviewer doctors. | In 27 (8%) of the consultations, the physicians’ decisions were considered unreasonable by the two reviewer doctors. |