Statistics from Altmetric.com
Traditionally, doctors have relied on all of their senses to diagnose and treat patients; detecting subtle changes in body language, actively listening and applying their professional wisdom and experience to clinical cases. This traditional model may be threatened by the increasing use of electronic consultations (‘e-consultations’). This editorial focuses solely on the use of emails to conduct electronic consultations and does not consider other models, such as Skype or video conferencing. In this editorial piece, the authors consider the potential advantages and disadvantages of e-consultations for doctors, patients, health services and society.
The concept of the electronic consultation is barely a decade old and is evolving.1 A meta-analysis conducted in 2016 by Liddy et al was unable to confidently define the prevalence of their use in the UK, but concluded that e-consultations are becoming increasingly utilised globally, particularly in the USA.2 The explosion of information and digital technology combined with increasingly busy lifestyles has led to the quest for convenience in accessing professional services. In a US poll, 90% of respondents wished to communicate with their physician electronically3 demonstrating a public perception that email communication offers quick and effective access to healthcare.4 E-consultations are also increasingly being adopted by other healthcare disciplines, including nursing.5
We find ourselves in a rapidly changing healthcare climate driven by an ageing population, increasing survival and life expectancy and growing clinical complexity. Coupled with challenges to service funding, alternative cost and time-saving clinical measures must be sought. E-consultations may provide part of a solution to the growing volume of clinical work. E-consultations can be used to take a clinical history, diagnose, reassure and treat.6 Some uses are contentious, however, particularly as part of therapeutic treatment algorithms, leading to the remote prescribing of medications. This has been identified as a key …
Contributors The idea was conceived and originally drafted by FG. Redrafting of the work and addition of further intellectual content was done by NG. Both authors took part in revising the work and gave final approval for its submission. Both authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.