Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
  • Subscribe BJGP on YouTube
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • BJGP LIFE
  • MORE
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Librarian information
    • Resilience
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Letters

Video consultations: quality, access, and equity in COVID and post-COVID general practice

James Matheson and on behalf of the RCGP Health Inequalities Standing Group
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (696): 329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp20X710861
James Matheson
Chair, RCGP Health Inequalities Standing Group. Email:
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: james.matheson@sharedhealth.org.uk
  • Article
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

COVID-19 has changed UK medicine, and general practice has proven agile and highly adaptable in changing how we consult to keep providing service to our patients during the pandemic. A key feature of this response has been using digital and video platforms to provide information and consult. Consulting at a distance has been convenient and well-received by patients and doctors alike, and, with no end to COVID’s threat imminent and the widespread adoption of video platforms, video consulting looks set to be a big part of primary care delivery going forward.

It is, however, important to recognise its limitations and, particularly, who it excludes. The Chair of the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) recently tweeted a reminder to us of Hammersley and colleagues’ prescient paper, ‘Comparing the content and quality of video, telephone, and face-to-face consultations: a non-randomised, quasi-experimental, exploratory study in UK primary care’.1 The authors found that, compared with face-to-face, video consultations performed markedly worse in all measured RCGP quality indicators, most strikingly in ‘place problems in a psychosocial context’, which was performed less than half as often.

COVID has shown us again the importance of that social context with socioeconomic deprivation dramatically increasing risks of catching and dying of the disease. It is another stark reminder of the social determinants of our health and omitting those from our consultations risks disregarding the fundamentals of what makes people sick or healthy.

The study also showed that video consulting was favoured by those who were young, technically proficient, who consulted less often, and had fewer problems, that is, those with the least need for our attention. Few video consultations have been carried out for those without smartphones, and those without internet or telephones — often those with the greatest need — are more adrift from care than ever.

As we look to the future of general practice — and video consulting will be a part of that future — it is imperative that we maintain the quality, including psychosocial context — food, finance, safety, and mental health — in our video and telephone consultations, and that we take steps, big ones if necessary, to mitigate the harms of digital poverty.

  • © British Journal of General Practice 2020

REFERENCE

  1. 1.↵
    1. Hammersley V,
    2. Donaghy E,
    3. Parker R,
    4. et al.
    Comparing the content and quality of video, telephone, and face-to-face consultations: a non-randomised, quasi-experimental, exploratory study in UK primary careBr J Gen Pract2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp19X704573.
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 70 (696)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 70, Issue 696
July 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Video consultations: quality, access, and equity in COVID and post-COVID general practice
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Video consultations: quality, access, and equity in COVID and post-COVID general practice
James Matheson, on behalf of the RCGP Health Inequalities Standing Group
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (696): 329. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X710861

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Video consultations: quality, access, and equity in COVID and post-COVID general practice
James Matheson, on behalf of the RCGP Health Inequalities Standing Group
British Journal of General Practice 2020; 70 (696): 329. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp20X710861
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCE
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Correction
  • Author response
  • General practice characteristics and chest X-ray rate
Show more Letters

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2022 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242