Implications of Electronic Consultations for Clinician Communication and Relationships: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Strong relationships and effective communication between clinicians support care coordination and contribute to care quality. As a new mechanism of clinician communication, electronic consultations (e-consults) may have downstream effects on care provision and coordination. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to understand primary care providers' and specialists' perspectives on how e-consults affect communication and relationships between clinicians. RESEARCH DESIGN: Qualitative study using thematic analysis of semistructured interviews. SUBJECTS: Six of 8 sites in the VISN 1 (Veterans Integrated Service Network) in New England were chosen, based on variation in organization and received e-consult volume. Seventy-three respondents, including 60 clinicians in primary care and 3 high-volume specialties (cardiology, pulmonology, and neurology) and 13 clinical leaders at the site and VISN level, were recruited. MEASURES: Participants' perspectives on the role and impact of e-consults on communication and relationships between clinicians. RESULTS: Clinicians identified 3 types of e-consults' social affordances: (1) e-consults were praised for allowing specialist advice to be more grounded in patient data and well-documented, but concerns about potential legal liability and increased transparency of communication to patients and others were also noted; (2) e-consults were perceived as an imperfect modality for iterative communication, especially for complex conversations requiring shared deliberation; (3) e-consults were understood as a factor influencing clinician relationships, but clinicians disagreed on whether e-consults promote or undermine relationship building. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians have diverse concerns about the implications of e-consults for communication and relationships. Our findings may inform efforts to expand and improve the use of e-consults in diverse health care settings.

Understanding suboptimal e-consult requests: lessons from the VA.

OBJECTIVES: Electronic consultations, or e-consults, which are requests for specialist advice without direct patient interaction, are becoming increasingly common across health systems. We sought to identify clinicians' perspectives on the quality of e-consult requests that they send and receive. STUDY DESIGN: A qualitative research study at the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) New England Healthcare System. METHODS: We interviewed a total of 73 clinicians, including 38 specialists across 3 specialties (cardiology, neurology, pulmonology) and 35 primary care clinicians (PCCs), between March and June 2019. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: VA specialists and PCCs generally agreed that e-consult requests should be focused and precise, not require lengthy chart review, and include adequate preliminary workup results. At the same time, specialists expressed frustration with what they perceived as suboptimal e-consult requests. Interviewees attributed this gap to 3 factors: limitations of the electronic health record user interface, divergence between PCCs and specialists in the areas of expertise, and organizational pressures on the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: VA clinicians' perspectives on suboptimal requests contain lessons that are broadly applicable to other health systems that seek to maximize the potential of e-consults to facilitate clinician collaboration and care coordination.

Electronic consultations and economies of scale: a qualitative study of clinician perspectives on scaling up e-consult delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To explore Veterans Health Administration clinicians' perspectives on the idea of redesigning electronic consultation (e-consult) delivery in line with a hub-and-spoke (centralized) model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study in VA New England Healthcare System (VISN 1). Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with 35 primary care providers and 38 specialty care providers, including 13 clinical leaders, at 6 VISN 1 sites varying in size, specialist availability, and e-consult volume. Interviews included exploration of the hub-and-spoke (centralized) e-consult model as a system redesign option. Qualitative content analysis procedures were applied to identify and describe salient categories. RESULTS: Participants saw several potential benefits to scaling up e-consult delivery from a decentralized model to a hub-and-spoke model, including expanded access to specialist expertise and increased timeliness of e-consult responses. Concerns included differences in resource availability and management styles between sites, anticipated disruption to working relationships, lack of incentives for central e-consultants, dedicated staff's burnout and fatigue, technological challenges, and lack of motivation for change. DISCUSSION: Based on a case study from one of the largest integrated healthcare systems in the United States, our work identifies novel concerns and offers insights for healthcare organizations contemplating a scale-up of their e-consult systems. CONCLUSIONS: Scaling up e-consults in line with the hub-and-spoke model may help pave the way for a centralized and efficient approach to care delivery, but the success of this transformation will depend on healthcare systems' ability to evaluate and address barriers to leveraging economies of scale for e-consults.

Electronic consultations (E-consults) and their outcomes: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Electronic consultations (e-consults) are clinician-to-clinician communications that may obviate face-to-face specialist visits. E-consult programs have spread within the US and internationally despite limited data on outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of the recent peer-reviewed literature on the effect of e-consults on access, cost, quality, and patient and clinician experience and identified the gaps in existing research on these outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched 4 databases for empirical studies published between 1/1/2015 and 2/28/2019 that reported on one or more outcomes of interest. Two investigators reviewed titles and abstracts. One investigator abstracted information from each relevant article, and another confirmed the abstraction. We applied the GRADE criteria for the strength of evidence for each outcome. RESULTS: We found only modest empirical evidence for effectiveness of e-consults on important outcomes. Most studies are observational and within a single health care system, and comprehensive assessments are lacking. For those outcomes that have been reported, findings are generally positive, with mixed results for clinician experience. These findings reassure but also raise concern for publication bias. CONCLUSION: Despite stakeholder enthusiasm and encouraging results in the literature to date, more rigorous study designs applied across all outcomes are needed. Policy makers need to know what benefits may be expected in what contexts, so they can define appropriate measures of success and determine how to achieve them.