advertising
-
1.
Klinge K and Bleckwenn M: Telemedicine - legal framework, medical applications and limits. MMW Fortschritte Medizin 163: 42, 2021.
-
2.
Stojmanovski Mercieca LA, Formosa C and Chockalingam N: A scoping review of foot and ankle telemedicine guidelines. Health Sci Rep 6: e1076, 2023.
-
3.
United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Sustainable Development: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal3. Accessed February 15, 2023.
-
4.
Santaguida P, Dolovich L, Oliver D, et al: Protocol for a Delphi consensus exercise to identify a core set of criteria for selecting health related outcome measures (HROM) to be used in primary health care. BMC Family Practice 19: 152, 2018.
-
5.
Waldmüller H, Spreckelsen C, Rudat H, et al: 360-degree Delphi: addressing sociotechnical challenges of healthcare IT. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 20: 101, 2020.
-
6.
Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson SA, et al: A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance. Int J Nurs Stud 154: 104705, 2024.
-
7.
Leone E, Healy A, Eddison N, et al: Policy brief: Framework to guide Allied Health Professional telehealth patient consultation guidelines and training. Research Square 2023. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2442422/v1.
-
8.
Pan American Health Organization. Framework for the Implementation of a Telemedicine Service. Available at: https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/28414. Accessed June 23, 2023).
-
9.
Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J: Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 19: 349, 2007.
-
10.
Jackson T, Pinnock H, Liew SM, et al: Patient and public involvement in research: from tokenistic box ticking to valued team members. BMC Medicine 18: 79, 2020.
-
11.
Brett J, Staniszewska S, Mockford C, et al: A systematic review of the impact of patient and public involvement on service users, researchers and communities. Patient 7: 387, 2014.
-
12.
Linstone HA: “The Delphi technique,” in Handbook of Futures Research, edited by RB Fowles, p 271, Greenwood, Westport, CT, 1978.
-
13.
Phillips R: New applications for the Delphi technique, Annual “San Diego” Pfeiffer and Company, Vol 2, p 191, 2000.
-
14.
Wild C and Torgersen H: Foresight in medicine: lessons from three European Delphi studies. Eur J Public Health 10: 114, 2000.
-
15.
Campbell SM, Cantrill JA and Roberts D: Prescribing indicators for UK general practice: Delphi consultation study. BMJ 321: 425, 2000.
Developing a Podiatric Telemedicine Framework for Service Users and Providers in a Primary-Care Setting
Search for other papers by Lisa Ann Stojmanovski Mercieca in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Cynthia Formosa in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Nachiappan Chockalingam in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background: The use of telemedicine has garnered significant traction amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. The sudden adoption of certain practices in podiatry was not always supported by empirical evidence, resulting in the development of guidelines and metrics that lacked a foundation in rigorous research.
Methods: A modified Delphi composed of three rounds was conducted with 16 stakeholders (service users, foot and ankle health-care providers, and policymakers) from a primary-care setting to develop a podiatric telemedicine framework for a primary-care setting. The first round consisted of focus group discussions, the second round consisted of a questionnaire composed of different statements that emerged from focus group discussions, and the final third round consisted of a questionnaire with statements from the second round that required further reiterations. Statements that achieved an 80% or higher level of agreement were accepted to form part of the podiatric telemedicine framework.
Results: Excellent consensus data was obtained to develop the podiatric telemedicine framework. Although podiatric telemedicine for low-risk patients in a primary-care setting is relatively new, stakeholders highlighted the importance of having podiatric telemedicine guidelines and setting service user and provider expectations clear on what podiatric telemedicine has to offer and its pitfalls.
Conclusions: The podiatric telemedicine framework developed is recommended to all foot and ankle health-care professionals in a primary-care setting who wish to provide telemedicine consultations. Moreover, it is recommended that a pilot study be carried out to look into the feasibility of this framework being translated and implemented as a guideline related to foot and ankle telemedicine consultations.
- Supplemental Material (PDF 2.02 MB)
advertising
