Affiliation:
1. ENT Department Royal National ENT and Eastman Dental Hospitals London UK
2. UCLH Biomedical Research Centre Hearing Health Theme London UK
Abstract
ABSTRACTIntroductionPathway innovation using smartphone otoscopy and tablet‐based audiometry technologies to deliver ear and hearing services via trained audiologists may improve efficiency of the service. An ENT‐integrated‐community‐ear service (ENTICES—combining community audiology management, remote ENT review and novel technologies) was piloted. We aimed to assess the efficiency and safety of ENTICES.MethodENTICES was a community‐based and audiologist‐led pathway. Patients with otological symptoms were self‐referred to this service. Smartphone otoscopy and tablet‐based audiograms were performed. Two otologists reviewed all decisions made in the community by audiologists based on video‐otoscopy, hearing tests and chart reviews. Data on the first 50 consecutive new patients attending either consultant‐led hospital otology clinics (HOC), audiologist‐led hospital advanced audiology diagnostics (AAD) or ENTICES clinics were collected between 1 August 2021 and 31 December 2021. Data were collected through chart reviews and questionnaires to compare the three pathways with respect to efficiency, patient satisfaction, technology utility and safety.ResultsNo audiology‐led ENTICES decisions were amended by hospital otologists following remote review. Remote review of video‐otoscopy with history was sufficient for a diagnosis in 80% of cases. Adding hearing tests and standardised history increased the diagnostic yield to 98%. Patient satisfaction scores showed 100% service recommendation. The cost per patient, per visit, was £83.36, £99.07 and £69.72 for AAD, HOC or ENTICES, respectively.ConclusionENTICES provides a safe ear and hearing service that patients rated highly. Thirty‐two per cent of hospital otology patients were eligible for this service. For those patients, ENTICES is 20% more cost‐effective and can reduce the number of clinic visits by up to 60% compared with HOC.