Lisa Wigham, Annette Richardson, Kathryn Moore, Michael Martin
{"title":"Implementing group consultations in a lower limb musculoskeletal outpatient service to improve efficiency and maintain positive patient outcomes.","authors":"Lisa Wigham, Annette Richardson, Kathryn Moore, Michael Martin","doi":"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002924","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Group consultations (GCs) in healthcare have been shown to improve clinical outcomes with greater efficiency. This project aimed to develop a more efficient musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapy-led GC approach for common lower limb problems. This was to help manage an anticipated increase in demand while maintaining high patient satisfaction and ensuring clinical effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three 'Plan-Do-Study-Act' (PDSA) cycles were undertaken to test out the new approach of virtual group consultations (VGCs) and face-to-face GCs with MSK patients. These two approaches were tested and refined on four common lower limb conditions: patellofemoral pain syndrome, Achilles tendinopathy, plantar fasciopathy and knee osteoarthritis. We measured the number of patients seen, staff time, patients' experience and patient outcome scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Each patient used 45 min of physiotherapy time via the traditional one-to-one physiotherapy consultation approach, this was reduced to 22 min in the VGCs and 12 min for the face-to-face GCs. We found a significant increase in EQ-5D scores (PDSA 1: +0.19, p=0.004 and PDSA 2: +0.17, p=0.002) and the Visual Analogue Score for Pain (PDSA 1: -1.95, p=0.001 and PDSA 2: -2.6, p=0.007) from the first to the second virtual GC sessions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GCs were shown to be an efficient way of providing physiotherapy to patients with lower limb conditions. Feedback from patients attending GCs has shown a good level of effectiveness and patient satisfaction. This alternative way to review and treat patients has yielded a reduction in physiotherapist contact time per patient, improving the efficiency of our MSK service. We did not compare these groups to the one-to-one face-to-face consultations, therefore whether they are better, is unknown.</p>","PeriodicalId":9052,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Quality","volume":"13 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002924","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Group consultations (GCs) in healthcare have been shown to improve clinical outcomes with greater efficiency. This project aimed to develop a more efficient musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapy-led GC approach for common lower limb problems. This was to help manage an anticipated increase in demand while maintaining high patient satisfaction and ensuring clinical effectiveness.
Methods: Three 'Plan-Do-Study-Act' (PDSA) cycles were undertaken to test out the new approach of virtual group consultations (VGCs) and face-to-face GCs with MSK patients. These two approaches were tested and refined on four common lower limb conditions: patellofemoral pain syndrome, Achilles tendinopathy, plantar fasciopathy and knee osteoarthritis. We measured the number of patients seen, staff time, patients' experience and patient outcome scores.
Results: Each patient used 45 min of physiotherapy time via the traditional one-to-one physiotherapy consultation approach, this was reduced to 22 min in the VGCs and 12 min for the face-to-face GCs. We found a significant increase in EQ-5D scores (PDSA 1: +0.19, p=0.004 and PDSA 2: +0.17, p=0.002) and the Visual Analogue Score for Pain (PDSA 1: -1.95, p=0.001 and PDSA 2: -2.6, p=0.007) from the first to the second virtual GC sessions.
Conclusion: GCs were shown to be an efficient way of providing physiotherapy to patients with lower limb conditions. Feedback from patients attending GCs has shown a good level of effectiveness and patient satisfaction. This alternative way to review and treat patients has yielded a reduction in physiotherapist contact time per patient, improving the efficiency of our MSK service. We did not compare these groups to the one-to-one face-to-face consultations, therefore whether they are better, is unknown.