Urogynecology

1
(No Transcript)
2
Access to Urogynecology Expertise Via
Telehealth An Innovative Service Delivery
Project

• Lesley Hanson RN BScN NCA
• Tele-Urogynecology Coordinator
• June 1, 2007

3
Outline

• History
• Clinical objectives
• Target groups challenges
• Innovation implementation

4
History

• Grant proposal approved by AHW in June 2005
• Nurse continence advisor (NCA) to use technology
  to address long Urogynecology waitlist
• Clinic staff to take part in education sessions
  via telehealth
• First patient seen in August 05

5
Objectives

• Improve access to services and reduce waitlist
• Provide expert continence care education to
  areas where care specialists may not be available
• Provide/enhance capacity building opportunities
  to remote/rural health care providers

6
Target Groups

• Patients referred to the Urogynecology Clinic
  from partnering health regions
• David Thompson Health Region,
• Aspen Regional Health Authority
• Peace Country Heath Region
• Northern Lights Health Region
• East Central Health Region
• First Nations Inuit Health Branch
• Health Service Providers
• Acute care
• Long term care
• Home Care

7
Anticipated Challenges

• Marketing the concept to local physicians care
  providers
• Patient age group unfamiliar with the technology
• Patient reluctance to discuss intimate subjects
  on camera
• Establishing a therapeutic relationship at a
  distance

8
Urogynecology Telehealth Service

• Innovation
• Altering traditional delivery model for
  continence care
• Results show that hands on is not the only way
• Clinician (RN/NCA) led project
• Illustrates that nursing care at a distance is an
  effective way to treat incontinence

9
Program Statistics Aug05-April 07414 urogyne
patients seen via telehealthNurse continence
advisor 137 new patient assessments 58
finished off waitlist (42) 202 f/u
assessmentsPhysicians 74 f/u patients
(physicians gt usage)20 education sessions
completed
10
Patient Satisfaction Survey Results

• Telehealth a satisfactory way to receive care?
• 97.1 agree/strongly agree
• How would they like their next visit arranged?
• 89.1 by telehealth
• 4.3 N/A
• Overall satisfied with telehealth services?
• 100 agree/strongly agree

11
Patient Satisfaction Survey Resultsn122
n137

• of kilometers patient would have had to travel
• 0-100 9/122 6.6
• 101-200 48/122 35.3
• 201-300 26/122 19.1
• 301-400 17/122 12.5
• gt 500 22/122 16.2
• Cost saving to the patient
• 0-100 42/137 30.7
• 100-300 53/137 38.7
• 301-500 24/137 17.5
• 501-700 9/137 6.5
• gt 701 7/137 5.1
• Cant afford to come 2/137 1.5

12
Patient Comments
This was my second telehealth conference and I
found it very valuable. It not only saved me many
dollars but increased my peace of mind. I
would feel uncomfortable having to get to the
city on my own. Since driving in Edmonton would
not be something Id want to do. Many of us from
northern Alberta come from farms and find a big
city intimidating so the telehealth conference
saved a lot of stress for me.
13
Sample of Patient Comments from Evaluations

• This telehealth is such a wonderful service. We
  are seniors and driving long distances is a major
  concern.
• Also the expense and time involved as my
  husband (who drives) has a memory problem which
  adds to our anxiety. Thank you very much for
  the benefit of this service.

14
Questions?
email Lesley.Hanson_at_capitalhealth.ca