Evaluation of videoconferenced grand rounds

Abstract

We evaluated various aspects of grand rounds videoconferenced from a tertiary care hospital to a regional hospital in Nova Scotia. During a five-month study period, 29 rounds were broadcast (19 in medicine and 10 in cardiology). The total recorded attendance at the remote site was 103, comprising 70 specialists, nine family physicians and 24 other health-care professionals. We received 55 evaluations, a response rate of 53%. On a five-point Likert scale (on which higher scores indicated better quality), mean ratings by remote-site participants of the technical quality of the videoconference were 3.0-3.5, with the lowest ratings being for ability to hear the discussion (3.0) and to see visual aids (3.1). Mean ratings for content, presentation, discussion and educational value were 3.8 or higher. Of the 49 physicians who presented the rounds, we received evaluations from 41, a response rate of 84%. The presenters rated all aspects of the videoconference and interaction with remote sites at 3.8 or lower. The lowest ratings were for ability to see the remote sites (3.0) and the usefulness of the discussion (3.4). We received 278 evaluations from participants at the presenting site, an estimated response rate of about 55%. The results indicated no adverse opinions of the effect of videoconferencing (mean scores 3.1-3.3). The estimated costs of videoconferencing one grand round to one site and four sites were C dollars 723 and C dollars 1515, respectively. The study confirmed that videoconferenced rounds can provide satisfactory continuing medical education to community specialists, which is an especially important consideration as maintenance of certification becomes mandatory.

Videoconference-based education for psychiatry registrars at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

“…9 Videoconference-based education for psychiatry registrars at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa Videoconference-based education is an integral component in many telehealth services in countries such as Australia 10 and include activities such as journal clubs, ward rounds, continuing and formal medical education. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] Studies evaluating these activities have reported general satisfaction with the use of videoconferencing and no difference in educational outcomes compared to traditional face to face teaching. [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] The Nelson R Mandela School of Medicine at the University of KwaZulu-Natal has increased the psychiatry registrar posts three-fold over the last three decades.…”

Improving Proton Therapy Accessibility Through Seamless Electronic Integration of Remote Treatment Planning Sites

“…For the field of radiation oncology, this product could provide main hospitals and their satellite institutions with a cost-effective platform to conduct both virtual tumor boards and dosimetry conferences with participating institutions. [22][23][24][25] Although this prototype solution was not adopted by our program, the lessons learned enabled us to develop the vastly superior system we have now (Fig. 4).…”

The Use of Telemedicine for Delivering Continuing Medical Education in Rural Communities

“…We, as well as others, have previously found similar results when polling remote attendees. [5][6][7][8] In this study, however, we attempted to compare evaluations from 650 CME conferences that had both inperson and remote conference attendees. Evaluation responses were generally lower for telemedicine attendees ( Table 2).…”

“…While this could be expected for affected small group sessions, it can also be problematic for larger, Grand Rounds-style programs. 5,7 Thankfully, we have migrated away from projector slides over the course of this study and can now directly transmit electronic presentations, which has improved quality over our previous experience. 5 Still, in this study, the audio quality was rated excellent or good only 73% of the time, and video quality was considered excellent or good only 64% of the time.…”