BT13: Teledermatology and the Montgomery rule of consent

S. Odedra, T. Chohan, I. Zaki and S. Ungureanu

Solihull Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

The Montgomery vs. Lanarkshire case of March 2015 is one of the most important UK judgments on informed consent. The ruling dictated that any intervention should be based on a shared decision, whereby patients are aware of all options and supported in making an informed decision. There is debate over whether patients requiring a procedure after a store-and-forward teledermatology consultation need a preoperative face-to-face (F2F) appointment to comply with this consent. We evaluated patient experiences of our skin cancer teledermatology pathway, whereby patients had a telephone consultation before a surgical appointment and their first visit to the hospital was for the procedure. On average, we receive 9000 2-week-wait referrals a year. In March 2020, following the UK’s nationwide lockdown, our dermatology department had 700 new referrals pending without any opportunity of F2F appointments. To meet this demand and the subsequent restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic, we established a teledermatology service. Patients attended a community hub where a detailed history was taken and lesions photographed by a medical photographer, including dermoscopic images. Clinical images were subsequently reviewed by a consultant dermatologist. For those requiring surgical procedures, preoperative telephone consultations were conducted. Patients requiring complex procedures and those with likely high-grade malignant melanoma were offered F2F appointments. During the telephone consultation, the planned procedure was explained, with risks, benefits and alternative treatments discussed. The first 50 patients were sent a survey comprising eight questions pertaining to their experience of the new pathway. Over a 4-week period, 34 responded. Mean age was 67 years (range 29–93). Ninety-seven patients felt photographs were taken in a timely manner. All patients reported that appropriate safety and social distancing precautions were taken. All patients described an overall positive experience, felt that sufficient information was provided throughout the pathway and were happy to engage with this service should they require a similar procedure in the future. In this cohort of patients, their first visit to hospital was for a procedure. There are many benefits in reducing F2F hospital attendances. As well as reducing footfall during the pandemic, there is less lost work time and cost of travel for patients or their relatives, more efficient use of hospital facilities and reduced carbon footprint. Our survey suggests that preoperative telephone consultations are liked by patients and appropriate in meeting the requirements of Montgomery consent for a teledermatology service.