The Impact of a Physiotherapy-Led Virtual Clinic in a South Australian Hospital: A Quantitative and Qualitative...

Background: As means of addressing ongoing challenges in accessing publicly funded specialist care, new models of care have been trialled. One such approach is using physiotherapists in advance practice roles, who in collaboration with other health professionals, act as an initial orthopedic point of contact and coordinate care. This research investigated the impact of a model of care, the Spinal Virtual Clinic Model, implemented for the first time in South Australia, using advanced practice physiotherapists in a large metropolitan hospital in South Australia. Although formally named the "Spinal Virtual Clinic" by the health service, this model does not involve direct patient contact and differs from traditional virtual or telehealth clinics. Instead, it is best understood as a physiotherapy-led referral triage and management service. Methods: This research was conducted in two stages. Stage 1 was a retrospective clinical audit of sequential patients triaged to the Spinal Virtual Clinic, as well as a follow up audit to capture any subsequent engagement with the Orthopaedic Spinal Service following the initial Spinal Virtual Clinic correspondence. Data were descriptively analysed. In Stage 2, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients from the Spinal Virtual Clinic to explore their perspectives on this model of care. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and independently analysed using thematic analysis. The sequential use of quantitative and qualitative approaches enabled us to both describe engagement with this model of care and better understand the underlying perspectives. Results: Three hundred and nine referrals were triaged to the physiotherapy-led spinal virtual clinic over a six-month period from 1 January 2021 to 30 June 2021. Majority of referrals were triaged as low acuity did not need formal spinal specialist review and could be managed safely in primary care. Therapist-led active management strategies (80.8%), trial of neuropathic medication (35.6%) closely followed by advice regarding targeted spinal injections (foraminal and epidural), were the most common conservative management strategies recommended. Only a small proportion needed surgical review. Interviews with eleven patients revealed that while many valued the convenience, timely advice, and reassurance offered by the service, others expressed confusion about the referral process and disappointment at not seeing a specialist. A key recommendation identified was improved communication, including providing patients with direct feedback alongside general practitioner correspondence. Conclusions: This research, underpinned by quantitative and qualitative research, has showcased the potential of this model of care, the spinal virtual clinic, to have a positive impact on improving access and reducing the burden on the health system for low acuity patients. As historical models of care become unsustainable and obsolete, alternative models of care can be implemented in health care settings where outpatient demand significantly exceeds capacity.