Evaluation of telemedicine for primary care.
Conditions
Interventions
Group 1: Observation group 1: General Practitioners use telemedicine to manage primary care case scenarios in a simulated environment
Group 2: Observation group 2: Emergency Physicians use telemedicin
Sponsors
Uniklinik RWTH Aachen
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Age
3 Years to No maximum
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: For the study subjects simulating the patient - For minors under the age of 14: participation of an accompanying person - Willingness to actively participate and comply with the study procedures - Written consent to participate in the study (for minors, also by legal guardians) The following also additionnaly applies to the group of physician subjects: - Proof of completed medical training and license to practice medicine - One of the following additional qualifications: additional license in emergency medicine, qualification as a telemedicine emergency physician OR specialist standard in general medicine
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: - no consent to participate in the study by the study subject or legal guardian - Existing pregnancy The following also applies to the group of physician test subjects: - Medical experience <3 years
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Medical feasibility of telemedical care for every individual case scenario. (a) Feasibility is assessed immediately after each individual case scenario using a questionnaire in which the participating physicians evaluate the respective case scenario in terms of its telemedical feasibility in real-world practical application (subjective assessment). (b) In addition, and based on video recordings of the study , the therapy performed is retrospectively compared with the expected target therapy, which was defined on the basis of existing guidelines (objective assessment). | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| (1) Additional indicators of the medical feasibility of the individual case scenarios, which are evaluated retrospectively on the basis of video recordings and from the telemedicine software output: time to diagnosis, total consultation duration, medical devices used, usage time of individual medical devices. (2) Technical feasibility of telemedicine. (a) Evaluated by study observers during the case scenarios and/or retrospectively based on video recordings: number of interruptions and technical malfunctions during the entire study period, type of technical malfunctions. (b) Functionality of the telemedicine software, surveyed by questionnaire ar the end of the study paticipation among the physician subjects and the study subjects simulating the patients. (3) Usability of the telemedicine examination booths, assessed among the participating the study subjects simulating the patients at the end of their participation in the study, using the System Usability Scale questionnaire. (4) Assessment of the quality of the medical device use in the study subjects simulating the patients, collected within a questionnaire after each case scenario among both (a9 the physician subjects (external assessment) and (b) the study subjects simulating the patients (self-assessment) (5) Possible obstacles to the telemedical care of the individual case scenarios in real-life, collected after each case scenario within a questionnaire among the physicians. (6) The potential of telemedicine booths for primary care in the event of a disaster, collected within a questionnaire at the end of the study participation (a) among both physician subjects and (b) among the study subjects simulating the patients. (7) Perceived quality of the physician-patient contact, collected after each case scenario using a questionnaire from the patient subjects. | — |
Countries
Germany
Contacts
Public ContactTobias Martin
Uniklinik RWTH Aachen
Outcome results
None listed