Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of real time 1:1 videoconferencing is growing in popularity in clinical practice. Authors have explored the effectiveness and acceptability of videoconferencing for patients; however, little research exists on the viewpoints of clinicians. METHODS: Patients with atraumatic shoulder instability attending a tertiary treatment centre were offered the choice of videoconferencing or a face-to-face consultation for their follow-up session. Immediately after the consultation a semi-structured interview was conducted to explore the underlying reasons behind its use and acceptability. RESULTS: All clinicians found the use of videoconferencing acceptable provided the patients were aware of its benefits and limitations. Of the 13 patients included in this study, seven chose to undergo a videoconferencing consultation. It was acceptable provided the clinical practice could be modified to achieve the objectives of the consultation. The use of videoconferencing required access to a quiet room with the appropriate technology. CONCLUSION: Videoconferencing is not acceptable to all. Benefits included not having to travel and the opportunity to assess and treat patients in their home environment. The use of videoconferencing did not allow for 'hands-on' assessment which was important for less experienced clinicians.