Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Virtual Telephone Consultations Against Traditional Face-to-Face Consultations in Spine Surgery Using an Objective Metric

Introduction: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) proved to be a catalyst in the paradigm change from face-to-face (F2F) to virtual consultations in trauma and orthopaedics. This study evaluates the efficacy of telephone consultations versus F2F reviews in an elective spine clinic. Methods: In this retrospective study, the clinic letters from elective spinal clinics were conducted over one month. Patients with lumbar spine pathology were included, divided into telephone and F2F groups, and further categorized into new referrals and follow-ups. The Ashford Clinic Letter Score (ACLS) was used to assess the efficacy of consultations. Results: Out of 126 spinal patients reviewed, 92 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 47 were F2F and 45 were telephone consultations. The mean satisfaction scores for all patients were 7.60 for F2F and 7.42 for telephone consultations, with no significant difference (p=0.202). New patient satisfaction scores were 7.64 for F2F and 7.35 for telephone (p=0.284), and follow-up scores were 7.58 for F2F and 7.48 for telephone (p=0.530). The results showed that there was no difference between face-to-face and virtual consultations. Conclusion: Telephone consultations are nearly as effective as F2F consultations in elective spine clinics, particularly for follow-up patients. The findings support the viability of telemedicine as an economical and efficient alternative method instead of traditional F2F consultations in orthopaedic practice. Further research is needed to explore patient satisfaction and outcomes in other spinal pathologies and to optimise patient stratification for telemedicine.