Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMilne-Ives, Madison
dc.contributor.authorLeydon, J
dc.contributor.authorMaramba, Inocencio Daniel
dc.contributor.authorChatterjee, Arunangsu
dc.contributor.authorMeinert, Edward
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-09T10:09:29Z
dc.date.issued2022-02-16
dc.identifier.issn2561-9128
dc.identifier.issn2561-9128
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18450
dc.description.abstract

Background

The National Health Service (NHS) cannot keep up with the demand for operations and procedures. Preoperative assessments can be conducted on the internet to improve efficiency and reduce wait times for operations. MyPreOp is a cloud-based platform where patients can complete preoperative questionnaires. These are reviewed by a nurse who determines whether they need a subsequent face-to-face appointment.

Objective

The primary objective of this study is to describe the potential impact of MyPreOp (Ultramed Ltd) on the number of face-to-face appointments. The secondary objectives are to examine the time spent on preoperative assessments completed using MyPreOp in NHS Trusts and user ratings of usability and acceptability.

Methods

The study design was a case study service evaluation. Data were collected using the MyPreOp system from 2 NHS Trusts (Guy’s and St Thomas’ and Royal United Hospitals Bath) and the private BMI Bath Clinic during the 4-month period from September to December 2020. Participants were adults of any age and health status at the participating hospitals who used MyPreOp to complete a preoperative assessment before a scheduled surgery. The primary outcome was the number of face-to-face appointments avoided by patients who used MyPreOp. The investigated secondary outcomes included the length of time spent by nurses completing preoperative assessments, associated travel-related carbon dioxide emissions compared with standard care, and quantitative user feedback. User feedback was assessed at all 3 sites; however, the other outcomes could only be examined in the Royal United Hospitals Bath sample because of data limitations.

Results

Data from 2500 participants were included. Half of the assessed patients did not need a further face-to-face appointment and required a median of only 5.3 minutes of nurses’ time to review. The reduction in appointments was associated with a small saving of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (9.05 tons). Patient feedback was generally positive: 79.8% (317/397) of respondents rated MyPreOp as easy or very easy to use, and 85.2% (340/399) thought the overall experience was good or very good.

Conclusions

This evaluation demonstrates the potential benefits of MyPreOp. However, further research using rigorous scientific methodology and a larger sample of NHS Trusts and users is needed to provide strong evidence of MyPreOp’s efficacy, usability, and cost-effectiveness.

dc.format.extente28612-e28612
dc.format.mediumElectronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherJMIR Publications
dc.relation.replaces10026.1/18448
dc.relation.replaceshttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18448
dc.relation.replaces10026.1/18448
dc.relation.replaceshttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18448
dc.subjectappointments
dc.subjectcost-effective
dc.subjecteconomic
dc.subjectpreoperative care
dc.subjectpreoperative period
dc.subjecttelehealth
dc.subjecttelemedicine
dc.titleThe potential impacts of a digital preoperative assessment service on appointments, travel-related carbon dioxide emissions, and user experience: a case study
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35171104
plymouth.issue1
plymouth.volume5
plymouth.publication-statusPublished online
plymouth.journalJMIR Perioperative Medicine
dc.identifier.doi10.2196/28612
pubs.merge-from10026.1/18448
pubs.merge-fromhttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18448
pubs.merge-from10026.1/18448
pubs.merge-fromhttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/18448
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/Peninsula Medical School
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Nursing and Midwifery
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA23 Education
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Researchers in ResearchFish submission
dc.publisher.placeCanada
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-10-15
dc.rights.embargodate2022-1-8
dc.identifier.eissn2561-9128
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.2196/28612
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-02-16
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV