Lessons Learnt (Clinical Outcomes and Cost Savings) from Virtual Stone Clinic and Their Application in the Era Post-COVID-19: Prospective Outcomes over a 6-Year Period from a University Teaching Hospital

Abstract

Introduction: We introduced a nurse-led telephone-based virtual stone clinic (VSC) follow-up for the surveillance of patients with asymptomatic renal calculi or those at a high risk of recurrent kidney stone disease (KSD). The aim of this study was to look at the outcomes of VSC and its role in the post-COVID era. Methods: Prospective outcomes audit was done for all patients referred to the VSC for a 6-year period (March 2014-April 2020). VSC is led by specialist stone nurses for ongoing surveillance of KSD patients. Results: A total of 290 patients were seen (468 individual appointments; 1.6-1.0 per patient), with a mean age of 57.0-15.8 years (range: 17-92) and a men-women ratio of 3:2. The referral was for surveillance of asymptomatic small renal stones (230, 79.3%); history of recurrent stone disease (45, 15.5%); solitary kidneys (5, 1.7%); cystine stones; young age; and other conditions (10, 3.4%). The mean stone size was 5.0-2.7 mm, followed up with kidney, ureter, and bladder radiograph (225, 77.6%) and ultrasound scan (USS) (65, 22.4%), for median duration of 12 months (range: 3-24 months). At the end, 132 patients (45.6%) remained in VSC, 106 (36.6%) were discharged, 47 (16.2%) returned to face-to-face clinic or treatment, and 5 (1.7%) had emergency admissions. Of 47 patients who returned, 23 (48.9%) developed new symptoms, 21 (44.6%) had stone growth, and 3 defaulted to face-to-face appointment. Thirty-five patients needed surgical intervention (URS-21, SWL-13, and PCNL-1) and 10 were managed conservatively. VSC reduced the cost per clinic appointment from £27.9 to £2 per patient (93% reduction), equating to a total saving of £12,006 for the study period. Conclusion: Nurse-led VSC not only provided a safe follow-up but also allowed to substantially reduce the cost of treatment by allowing patients to be either discharged or return to a face-to-face clinic or surgical intervention if needed. Post-COVID, this model using telemedicine will have a much wider uptake and further help to optimize health care resources.

Virtual Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies: A Single-Institution Experience

“…Several studies from the solid tumor literature have demonstrated innovative virtual programs for delivering cancer services that have reduced the cost and time burden of appointments. 24 A study of Veterans receiving follow-up for pulmonary nodules found a 47% cost decrease when a visit was virtual compared with in-person (from $228 to $120 USD), and an average travel avoidance of 86 miles (138.4 km) per patient. 25 These results are similar to those described in our study, in which we found an average savings of 121.1 minutes and an opportunity cost-savings of $133.10 CAD (SD $102.10 CAD) per patient per visit.…”

Can We Identify Patients in Danger of Delayed Treatment? Management of COVID-19 Pandemic Backlog in Urology Care in Poland

“…The everyday practice has been tremendously changed both in hospital and ambulatory care. The measures taken to advance patient safety triggered a prompt application of telemedicine and information technology systems, which otherwise would have been pending their implementation for another decade [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 ].…”

Telemedicine and Telehealth in Urology: Uptake, Impact and Barriers to Clinical Adoption

“…Hughes et al ( 14 ) in their study established the feasibility of video visits by patients as opposed to in-person visits and used the metric of “revisit” rates to determine success. They found that revisit rates were more when the initial visit was in an in-patient setting as compared to a virtual clinic approach.…”