PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9357641

Do electronic mail discussion lists act as virtual colleagues?

Abstract

Anesthesiology Discussion Group (ADG), an electronic mail (email) discussion list, has previously been shown to be a clinically oriented, cost-effective form of telemedicine. ADG is composed of an international collection of anesthesia providers. Discussions with colleagues are generally informal in nature and are examples of types of information-seeking behavior which frequently occur in hallways or lounges of a hospital or clinic. Information-seeking occurs when a health care provider searches for information which will be used to solve or satisfy a patient's problem or need. We surveyed practitioners who had previously submitted non-rhetorical, clinical questions to the group. After analysis of the questionnaire results, we conclude that ADG is a valuable resource used for information-seeking and is a clinically effective form of telemedicine. Many of the respondents indicated that they used ADG to obtain second opinions from the collective expertise of group members. Respondents also indicated that they were generally satisfied with the quality of responses and would not hesitate to use ADG for future clinical questions.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E R Worth, T B Patrick. 1997. Do electronic mail discussion lists act as virtual colleagues?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9357641/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Perception of training needs and opportunities in advanced airway skills: a survey of British and Irish trainees.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We surveyed delegates at the Group of Anaesthetists in Training (UK) meeting to investigate evidence of a training-gap (number of fibreoptic intubations believed to bestow competence vs. number actually performed). METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to and collected from delegates in person. Questions covered six areas, including experience of fibreoptic intubation and cricothyrotomy, fibreoptic intubation as a specialist skill and ethical issues. RESULTS: We received 221 replies (76%). All trainees believed competence to be achievable with 10 intubations (interquartile range (IQR) 10-20); the median number performed was 2 (IQR 0-4). This was statistically significant for the groups' senior house officers, 1st and 2nd year registrars and 3rd and 4th year registrars; P < 0.0001. Many final year trainees (12/20, 60%) also failed to achieve their competency target. Few trainees had seen or performed any cricothyrotomies (medians 0, IQRs 0-1 and 0-0). Most (195/208, 94%) believed that fibreoptic intubation was a core skill and 199/212 (94%) believed that all should be competent by completion of training. Ten percent (n = 208) felt it unethical to perform an awake training intubation with full consent and 10% believed it acceptable without explanation. Most (82.7%) would fibreoptically intubate an asleep patient (requiring intubation) without consent. CONCLUSION: Trainees reported a gap between their perception of competence and achievement in awake fibreoptic intubation. Simple and complex simulations and structured training programmes may help. Anaesthetists must address the ethics of clinical training in advanced airway management.

Anesthesiology↗