Cited by 105Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHealthcare Systems and TechnologyRadiology practices and education

Randomised controlled trial of telemedicine for new neurological outpatient referrals

Open access
Chua, R·2001·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that telemedicine for new patient referrals to neurological outpatients is as efficient and acceptable as conventional face to face consultation. METHODS: A randomised controlled trial between two groups: face to face (FF) and telemedicine (TM). This study was carried out between a neurological centre and outlying clinics at two distant hospitals linked by identical medium cost commercial interactive video conferencing equipment with ISDN lines transmitting information at 384 kbits/s. The same two neurologists carried out both arms of the study. Of the 168 patients who were suitable for the study, 86 were randomised into the telemedicine group and 82 into the face to face group. Outcome measures were (1) consultation process: (a) number of investigations; (b) number of drugs prescribed; (c) number of patient reviews and (2) patient satisfaction: (a) confidence in consultation; (b) technical aspects of consultation; (c) aspects surrounding confidentiality. Diagnostic categories were also measured to check equivalence between the groups: these were structural neurological, structural non-neurological, non-structural, and uncertain. RESULTS: Diagnostic categories were similar (p>0.5) between the two groups. Patients in the telemedicine group had significantly more investigations (p=0.001). There was no difference in the number of drugs prescribed (p>0.5). Patients were generally satisfied with both types of consultation process except for concerns about confidentiality and embarrassment in the telemedicine group (p=0.017 and p=0.005 respectively). CONCLUSION: Telemedicine for new neurological outpatients is possible and feasible but generates more investigations and is less well accepted than face to face examination.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jnnp.71.1.63

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Similar findings on patient satisfaction in telemedicine have been reported in other RCTs.

    “Similar findings have also been reported in other RCTs of patient satisfaction in telemedicine.”

    From Telemedicine in dermatology: a randomised controlled trial (2006) · cites this paper as [40]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Craig JJ, McConville JP, Patterson VH, et al. Neurological examination is possible using telemedicine. J Telemed Telecare 1999;5:177-81.
  2. Craig JJ, Russell C, Patterson VH, et al. User satisfaction with real-time teleneurology. J Telemed Telecare 1999;5: 237-42.
  3. Craig JJ, Chua R, Wootton R, et al. A pilot study of telemedicine for new neurological outpatient referrals. J Telemed Telecare 2000;6:225-8.
  4. Patterson VH, Esmonde TFG. Comparison of the handling of neurological outpatient referrals by general physicians and a neurologist. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1993;56: 830-3.
  5. Patterson V, Craig J, Pang KA, et al. Successful management of unexplained coma by telemedicine. J Telemed Telecare 1999;5:134-6.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chua, R.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Chua, R
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2001-07-01
Volume
71
Issue
1
Pages
63-66
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2078826170
Cited by
105
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Healthcare Systems and Technology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiology practices and education
Keywords
telemedicine, videoconferencing, face-to-face consultation, patient satisfaction, confidentiality, diagnostic workup, drug prescribing, feasibility, teleconsultation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Ambulatory Care, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nervous System Diseases, Referral and Consultation, Patient Satisfaction, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Telemedicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review