Following COVID-19 clinicians now overwhelmingly accept virtual clinics in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

Virtual consultations and telemedicine have been an emerging trend in modern medicine, which has seen acceleration in uptake across a wide range of specialties as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Following on from previous work by the authors in 2019 examining clinician and patient appetite for virtual consultations in maxillofacial surgery, we sought to evaluate whether there had been a change in attitudes as a result of the pandemic. A clinician survey of the consultants at a large teaching hospital and prospective data collection of virtual consultation outcomes was carried out from the inception of UK government lockdown measures to tackle the pandemic. From 151 consultations, 149 (98.7%) successfully established a working diagnosis and treatment plan and/or concluded an episode of patient care, without the need to convert to a face-to-face encounter between clinician and patient. The total number of consultations (virtual or otherwise) was significantly lower than the same time period the preceding year however (1,223 compared with 465 consultations). All consultants surveyed felt the pandemic had altered their opinion of virtual clinics and their place in maxillofacial surgery but cited a number of issues. Further work is required to understand the driving forces behind staff attitudes and the long-term adoption of telemedicine within the specialty as services return to some sense of normalcy.

Clinicians' and patients' acceptance of the virtual clinic concept in maxillofacial surgery: a departmental survey.

Virtual clinics have been proposed as a method of reducing costs and improving services in the National Health Service (NHS). The aim of this research was to assess the attitudes of clinicians and patients towards virtual consultations in a department of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). Patients and clinicians at conventional OMFS adult outpatient clinics were prospectively interviewed using a structured questionnaire. Variables recorded included type of consultation, overall attitude, time travelled, and mode of transport. Patients' notes were assessed retrospectively to check if examinations had been done. A total of 146 patients (100%) completed the surveys, and 108 of them (74%) were amenable to having virtual consultations in the future. Such appointments may have been suitable for 19 patients who did not have examinations. Chi squared analysis showed no relation between type of appointment and preference for a virtual consultation (p=0.087). To introduce a virtual consultation system in our department and to assess its efficacy once implemented, further development and research are required.