Video Based Assessment of Treatment Urgency in Outpatient Orthopaedic and Trauma Patients - a Pilot Trial. / Videobasierte Einschätzung der Behandlungsdringlichkeit - eine Pilotstudie für ambulante Patienten in der Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: When consulting a specialist in orthopaedics and trauma surgery, personal assessment and manual clinical examination by the doctor on site are essential. Nevertheless, implementation of video consultation hours has been made legally easier in Germany. The present pilot study examines the possibility of video-based assessment of the urgency of treatment in outpatient orthopaedic and trauma patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within an ex ante study design, 40 patients with an orthopaedic clinical picture for trauma surgery with elective, urgent or emergency indication were selected from consultation hours. A short questionnaire was filled in based on the information provided and a medical colleague simulated a movement sequence based on the patient information. After modification to the "red flags" and "yellow flags" established in spinal orthopaedics, nine short questions were recorded, which inquire about the urgency of a medical consultation. The video-based movement sequence is based on a 60 s long instruction video in which motor tests and movement sequences are demonstrated Cervical spine movement in all levels, elevation of the upper extremity, test of the finger-floor distance when "bending forward over-bending", possibility of crouching from standing and getting up again, standing on heels and toes. RESULTS: In 91.1% (n = 328) of the cases, the diagnosis was associated with the same joint or the same pathological entity. In 37.5% (n = 135) of the cases an emergency indication was seen, in 10.8% (n = 39) of the cases an urgent indication and in 51.6% (n = 186) of the cases it was seen to offer an elective indication. 12.5% (n = 45) of the cases were evaluated as "false positives" with regard to an emergency or urgent presentation. This means that the test persons were classified as "emergency" or "urgent", although there was no preventable dangerous course or medical emergency. 18 cases (5%) were evaluated as "false negative". DISCUSSION: The screening questionnaire presented and the short video assessment are technically feasible and practicable method for the initial evaluation in video-based online medical consultation. In addition, the questionnaire presented in combination with the short video assessment was suitable as an instrument for assessing the urgency of the consultation and selecting preventable dangerous processes and acute emergencies. CONCLUSION: The questionnaire, in combination with the short video assessment, is a suitable method for the social distancing requirements during limited accessibility of the medical system. Nevertheless, a false negative rate of 5% is too high to implement the questionnaire presented into daily clinics without further optimisation.