BackgroundThe Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the largest nationally integrated health system in the United States, is transitioning from its homegrown electronic health record (EHR) to a new vendor-based EHR, Oracle Cerner. Experiences of the first VA site to transition have been widely discussed in the media, but in-depth accounts based on rigorous research are lacking. ObjectiveWe sought to explore employee perspectives on the rationale for, and value of, transitioning from a VA-tailored EHR to a vendor-based product. MethodsAs part of a larger mixed methods, multisite, formative evaluation of VA clinician and staff experiences with the EHR transition, we conducted semistructured interviews at the Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical Center before, during, and after going live in October 2020. In total, we completed 122 interviews with 26 participants across multiple departments. ResultsBefore the new vendor-based EHR went live, participants initially expressed cautious optimism about the transition. However, in subsequent interviews following the go-live, participants increasingly critiqued the vendor’s understanding of VA’s needs, values, and workflows, as well as what they perceived as an inadequate fit between the functionalities of the new vendor-based EHR system and VA’s characteristic approach to care. As much as a year after going live, participants reiterated these concerns while also expressing a desire for substantive changes to the transition process, with some questioning the value of continuing with the transition. ConclusionsVA’s transition from a homegrown EHR to a vendor-based EHR system has presented substantial challenges, both practical and cultural in nature. Consequently, it is a valuable case study for understanding the sociotechnical dimension of EHR-to-EHR transitions. These findings have implications for both VA leadership and the broader community of policy makers, vendors, informaticists, and others involved in large-scale health information technology implementations.

Objectives The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is transitioning from its legacy electronic health record (EHR) to a new commercial EHR in a nationwide, rolling-wave transition. We evaluated clinician and staff experiences to identify strategies to improve future EHR rollouts.Materials and Methods We completed a convergent mixed-methods formative evaluation collecting survey and interview data to measure and describe clinician and staff experiences. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics; interview transcripts were coded using a combination of a priori and emergent codes followed by qualitative content analysis. Qualitative and quantitative findings were compared to provide a more comprehensive understanding of participant experience. Employees of specialty and primary care teams at the first nationwide EHR transition site agreed to participate in our study. We distributed surveys at 1-month pre-transition, 2 months post-transition, and 10 months post-transition to each of the 68 identified team members and completed longitudinal interviews with 30 of these individuals totaling 122 semi-structured interviews.Results Interview participants reported profoundly disruptive experiences during the EHR transition that persisted at 1-year post implementation. Survey responses indicated training difficulties throughout the transition, and sharp declines (P <= .05) between pre- and post-go-live measures of EHR usability and increase in EHR burden that were perceived to be due in part to system inefficiencies, discordant positive messaging that initially ignored user challenges, and inadequate support for and attention to ongoing EHR issues. Participants described persistent high levels of stress associated with these disruptions.Discussion Our findings highlight strategies to improve employee experiences during EHR transitions: (1) working with Oracle Cerner to resolve known issues and improve usability; (2) role-based training with opportunities for self-directed learning; (3) peer-led support systems and timely feedback on issues; (4) messaging that responds to challenges and successes; and (5) continuous efforts to support staff with issues and address clinician and staff stress and burnout.Conclusion Our findings provide relevant strategies to navigate future EHR transitions while supporting clinical teams. The Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals are replacing the software that stores their electronic patient medical information. Their current software was made within the VA. The new software was purchased from a company. This replacement process will require big changes to how VA medical staff work. We wanted to understand what staff went through at the VA; we wanted to help make this process easier. VA staff told us about huge work upsets and negative experiences during and after this change. Some problems were related to a lack of specific training specific about how they would use the software for their jobs. Another problem was related to delays in getting help using the system. Staff also had problems telling their leaders about how the system was not working. This article is about how to improve employee experience when other hospitals switch to the new EHR.

Background Electronic health record (EHR) transitions are increasingly widespread and often highly disruptive. It is imperative we learn from past experiences to anticipate and mitigate such disruptions. Veterans Affairs (VA) is undergoing a large-scale transition from its homegrown EHR (CPRS/Vista) to a commercial EHR (Cerner), creating a unique opportunity of shedding light on large-scale EHR-to-EHR transition challenges. Objective To explore one facet of the organizational impact of VA’s EHR transition: its implications for employees’ roles and responsibilities at the first VA site to implement Cerner Millennium EHR. Design As part of a formative evaluation of frontline staff experiences with VA’s EHR transition, we conducted brief (~ 15 min) and full-length interviews (~ 60 min) with clinicians and staff at Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical Center in Spokane, WA, before, during, and after transition (July 2020-November 2021). Participants We conducted 111 interviews with 26 Spokane clinicians and staff, recruited via snowball sampling. Approach We conducted audio interviews using a semi-structured guide with grounded prompts. We coded interview transcripts using a priori and emergent codes, followed by qualitative content analysis. Key Results Unlike VA’s previous EHR, Cerner imposes additional restrictions on access to its EHR functionality based upon “roles” assigned to users. Participants described a mismatch between established institutional duties and their EHR permissions, unanticipated changes in scope of duties brought upon by the transition, as well as impediments to communication and collaboration due to different role-based views. Conclusions Health systems should anticipate substantive impacts on professional workflows when EHR role settings do not reflect prior workflows. Such changes may increase user error, dissatisfaction, and patient care disruptions. To mitigate employee dissatisfaction and safety risks, health systems should proactively plan for and communicate about expected modifications and monitor for unintended role-related consequences of EHR transitions, while vendors should ensure accurate role configuration and assignment.

OBJECTIVES:Electronic consultations, or e-consults, which are requests for specialist advice without direct patient interaction, are becoming increasingly common across health systems. We sought to identify clinicians' perspectives on the quality of e-consult requests that they send and receive. STUDY DESIGN:A qualitative research study at the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) New England Healthcare System. METHODS:We interviewed a total of 73 clinicians, including 38 specialists across 3 specialties (cardiology, neurology, pulmonology) and 35 primary care clinicians (PCCs), between March and June 2019. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS:VA specialists and PCCs generally agreed that e-consult requests should be focused and precise, not require lengthy chart review, and include adequate preliminary workup results. At the same time, specialists expressed frustration with what they perceived as suboptimal e-consult requests. Interviewees attributed this gap to 3 factors: limitations of the electronic health record user interface, divergence between PCCs and specialists in the areas of expertise, and organizational pressures on the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS:VA clinicians' perspectives on suboptimal requests contain lessons that are broadly applicable to other health systems that seek to maximize the potential of e-consults to facilitate clinician collaboration and care coordination.

BACKGROUND:Strong relationships and effective communication between clinicians support care coordination and contribute to care quality. As a new mechanism of clinician communication, electronic consultations (e-consults) may have downstream effects on care provision and coordination.OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to understand primary care providers' and specialists' perspectives on how e-consults affect communication and relationships between clinicians.RESEARCH DESIGN:Qualitative study using thematic analysis of semistructured interviews.SUBJECTS:Six of 8 sites in the VISN 1 (Veterans Integrated Service Network) in New England were chosen, based on variation in organization and received e-consult volume. Seventy-three respondents, including 60 clinicians in primary care and 3 high-volume specialties (cardiology, pulmonology, and neurology) and 13 clinical leaders at the site and VISN level, were recruited.MEASURES:Participants' perspectives on the role and impact of e-consults on communication and relationships between clinicians.RESULTS:Clinicians identified 3 types of e-consults' social affordances: (1) e-consults were praised for allowing specialist advice to be more grounded in patient data and well-documented, but concerns about potential legal liability and increased transparency of communication to patients and others were also noted; (2) e-consults were perceived as an imperfect modality for iterative communication, especially for complex conversations requiring shared deliberation; (3) e-consults were understood as a factor influencing clinician relationships, but clinicians disagreed on whether e-consults promote or undermine relationship building.CONCLUSIONS:Clinicians have diverse concerns about the implications of e-consults for communication and relationships. Our findings may inform efforts to expand and improve the use of e-consults in diverse health care settings.

OBJECTIVE To explore Veterans Health Administration clinicians' perspectives on the idea of redesigning electronic consultation (e-consult) delivery in line with a hub-and-spoke (centralized) model. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted a qualitative study in VA New England Healthcare System (VISN 1). Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted with 35 primary care providers and 38 specialty care providers, including 13 clinical leaders, at 6 VISN 1 sites varying in size, specialist availability, and e-consult volume. Interviews included exploration of the hub-and-spoke (centralized) e-consult model as a system redesign option. Qualitative content analysis procedures were applied to identify and describe salient categories. RESULTS Participants saw several potential benefits to scaling up e-consult delivery from a decentralized model to a hub-and-spoke model, including expanded access to specialist expertise and increased timeliness of e-consult responses. Concerns included differences in resource availability and management styles between sites, anticipated disruption to working relationships, lack of incentives for central e-consultants, dedicated staff's burnout and fatigue, technological challenges, and lack of motivation for change. DISCUSSION Based on a case study from one of the largest integrated healthcare systems in the United States, our work identifies novel concerns and offers insights for healthcare organizations contemplating a scale-up of their e-consult systems. CONCLUSIONS Scaling up e-consults in line with the hub-and-spoke model may help pave the way for a centralized and efficient approach to care delivery, but the success of this transformation will depend on healthcare systems' ability to evaluate and address barriers to leveraging economies of scale for e-consults.

Objective Electronic consultations (e-consults) are clinician-to-clinician communications that may obviate face-to-face specialist visits. E-consult programs have spread within the US and internationally despite limited data on outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of the recent peer-reviewed literature on the effect of e-consults on access, cost, quality, and patient and clinician experience and identified the gaps in existing research on these outcomes. Materials and Methods We searched 4 databases for empirical studies published between 1/1/2015 and 2/28/2019 that reported on one or more outcomes of interest. Two investigators reviewed titles and abstracts. One investigator abstracted information from each relevant article, and another confirmed the abstraction. We applied the GRADE criteria for the strength of evidence for each outcome. Results We found only modest empirical evidence for effectiveness of e-consults on important outcomes. Most studies are observational and within a single health care system, and comprehensive assessments are lacking. For those outcomes that have been reported, findings are generally positive, with mixed results for clinician experience. These findings reassure but also raise concern for publication bias. Conclusion Despite stakeholder enthusiasm and encouraging results in the literature to date, more rigorous study designs applied across all outcomes are needed. Policy makers need to know what benefits may be expected in what contexts, so they can define appropriate measures of success and determine how to achieve them.

Objective: Electronic consultations (e-consults) are clinician-to-clinician communications that may obviate faceto-face specialist visits. E-consult programs have spread within the US and internationally despite limited data on outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of the recent peer-reviewed literature on the effect of e-consults on access, cost, quality, and patient and clinician experience and identified the gaps in existing research on these outcomes. Materials and Methods: We searched 4 databases for empirical studies published between 1/1/2015 and 2/28/ 2019 that reported on one or more outcomes of interest. Two investigators reviewed titles and abstracts. One investigator abstracted information from each relevant article, and another confirmed the abstraction. We applied the GRADE criteria for the strength of evidence for each outcome. Results: We found only modest empirical evidence for effectiveness of e-consults on important outcomes. Most studies are observational and within a single health care system, and comprehensive assessments are lacking. For those outcomes that have been reported, findings are generally positive, with mixed results for clinician experience. These findings reassure but also raise concern for publication bias. Conclusion: Despite stakeholder enthusiasm and encouraging results in the literature to date, more rigorous study designs applied across all outcomes are needed. Policy makers need to know what benefits may be expected in what contexts, so they can define appropriate measures of success and determine how to achieve them. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association 2019. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US. 1 Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 0(0), 2019, 1–9 doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocz185 Review ow naded rom http/academ ic.p.com jam ia/advance-astract/doi/10.1093/jam ia/ocz5/5588944 by U niersity of C orado sstem s user on 30 O cber 2019

Electronic consultations (e-consults) improve access to specialty care without requiring face-to-face patient visits. We conducted a mixed-methods descriptive study to understand the variability in e-consult use across anesthesiology departments in the Veterans Affairs New England Healthcare System (VANEHS). In the period 2012-15, the system experienced a rapid increase in the use of anesthesiology e-consults: 5,023 were sent in 2015, compared with 103 in 2012. Uptake across sites varied from near-universal use of e-consults for preoperative assessment to use for only selected low-risk patients or no use. Interviews with stakeholders revealed considerable differences in the perceived impact of e-consults on workflow and patient-centeredness. Clinicians at sites with high use of e-consults noted that they improved workflow efficiency. In comparison, clinicians at sites with low use preferentially valued face-to-face visits for some or all patients. The adoption of a health information technology innovation can alter the process of care delivery, depending on perceptions of its value by key stakeholders.

Introduction E-consultations (e-consults) were implemented at VA medical centers to improve access to specialty care. Cardiology e-consults are among the most commonly requested, but little is known about how primary care providers (PCPs) use cardiology e-consults to access specialty care. Methods This is a retrospective analysis of 750 patients’ medical charts with cardiology e-consults requested by medical providers (October 2013–September 2015) in the VA New England Healthcare System. We described the patients and referring provider characteristics, and e-consult questions. We reviewed cardiologists’ responses and examined their recommendations. Results Among the 424 e-consults requested from PCPs, 92.7% were used to request answers to clinical questions, while 7.3% were used for administrative purposes. Among the 393 e-consults with clinical questions, 60 e-consults were regarding preoperative management; these questions most commonly addressed general risk assessment ( n = 44), anti-coagulation/anti-platelet management ( n = 33), and EKG interpretation ( n = 20). Cardiologists provided answers for the majority (89.6%) of clinical questions. Among the e-consults in which cardiologists did not provide answers or clinical guidance ( n = 41), the reasons included missing or insufficient clinical information ( n = 18), medical complexity ( n = 6), and deferment to the patient’s non-VA primary cardiologist ( n = 7). Cardiologists recommended that the patients be seen as face-to-face consults for 7.9% of e-consults. Discussion Primary care providers are the most frequent requesters of cardiology e-consults, using them primarily to obtain input on clinical questions. Cardiologists did not provide answers for one in ten, owing principally to insufficient available clinical information. Educating PCPs and standardizing the template for requesting e-consultation may help to reduce the number of unanswered e-consults.

BackgroundElectronic consultation is an emerging mode of specialty care delivery that allows primary care providers and their patients to obtain specialist expertise without an in-person visit. While studies of individual programs have demonstrated benefits related to timely access to specialty care, electronic consultation programs have not achieved widespread use in the United States. The lack of common evaluation metrics across health systems and concerns related to the generalizability of existing evaluation efforts may be hampering further growth. We sought to identify gaps in knowledge related to the implementation of electronic consultation programs and develop a set of shared evaluation measures to promote further diffusion.MethodsUsing a case study approach, we apply the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) and the Quadruple Aim frameworks of evaluation to examine electronic consultation implementation across diverse delivery systems. Data are from 4 early adopter healthcare delivery systems (San Francisco Health Network, Mayo Clinic, Veterans Administration, Champlain Local Health Integration Network) that represent varied organizational structures, care for different patient populations, and have well-established multi-specialty electronic consultation programs. Data sources include published and unpublished quantitative data from each electronic consultation database and qualitative data from systems' end-users.ResultsOrganizational drivers of electronic consultation implementation were similar across the systems (challenges with timely and/or efficient access to specialty care), though unique system-level facilitators and barriers influenced reach, adoption and design. Effectiveness of implementation was consistent, with improved patient access to timely, perceived high-quality specialty expertise with few negative consequences, garnering high satisfaction among end-users. Data about patient-specific clinical outcomes are lacking, as are policies that provide guidance on the legal implications of electronic consultation and ideal remuneration strategies.ConclusionA core set of effectiveness and implementation metrics rooted in the Quadruple Aim may promote data-driven improvements and further diffusion of successful electronic consultation programs.

OBJECTIVE Rigorous evidence is lacking whether online games can improve patients’ longer-term health outcomes. We investigated whether an online team-based game delivering diabetes self-management education (DSME) to patients via e-mail or mobile application (app) can generate longer-term improvements in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients (n = 456) on oral diabetes medications with HbA1c ≥58 mmol/mol were randomly assigned between a DSME game (with a civics booklet) and a civics game (with a DSME booklet). The 6-month games sent two questions twice weekly via e-mail or mobile app. Participants accrued points based on performance, with scores posted on leaderboards. Winning teams and individuals received modest financial rewards. Our primary outcome measure was HbA1c change over 12 months. RESULTS DSME game patients had significantly greater HbA1c reductions over 12 months than civics game patients (−8 mmol/mol [95% CI −10 to −7] and −5 mmol/mol [95% CI −7 to −3], respectively; P = 0.048). HbA1c reductions were greater among patients with baseline HbA1c >75 mmol/mol: −16 mmol/mol [95% CI −21 to −12] and −9 mmol/mol [95% CI −14 to −5] for DSME and civics game patients, respectively; P = 0.031. CONCLUSIONS Patients with diabetes who were randomized to an online game delivering DSME demonstrated sustained and meaningful HbA1c improvements. Among patients with poorly controlled diabetes, the DSME game reduced HbA1c by a magnitude comparable to starting a new diabetes medication. Online games may be a scalable approach to improve outcomes among geographically dispersed patients with diabetes and other chronic diseases.

The impact of e-consults on total consultative services was evaluated. After implementing infectious diseases e-consults within an electronically integrated healthcare system, consultation volume increased. As compared with face-to-face consultations, e-consults were more often related to antimicrobial guidance and were requested by off-site providers. E-consults increased the breadth and volume of total consults.

BACKGROUND:Difficult conversations in medical care often occur between physicians and patients' surrogates, individuals entrusted with medical decisions for patients who lack the capacity to make them. Poor communication between patients' surrogates and physicians may exacerbate anxiety and guilt for surrogates, and may contribute to physician stress and burnout.OBJECTIVE:This pilot study assesses the effectiveness of an experiential learning workshop that was conducted in a clinical setting, and aimed at improving resident physician communication skills with a focus on surrogate decision-making.METHODS:From April through June 2016, we assessed internal medicine residents' baseline communication skills through an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with actors representing standardized surrogates. After an intensive, 6-hour communication skills workshop, residents were reassessed via an OSCE on the same day. A faculty facilitator and the surrogate evaluated participants' communication skills via the expanded Gap Kalamazoo Consensus Statement Assessment Form. Wilcoxon signed rank tests (α of .05) compared mean pre- and postworkshop scores.RESULTS:Of 44 residents, 33 (75%) participated. Participants' average preworkshop OSCE scores (M = 3.3, SD = 0.9) were significantly lower than postworkshop scores (M = 4.3; SD = 0.8; Z = 4.193; P < .001; effect size r = 0.52). After the workshop, the majority of participants self-reported feeling "more confident."CONCLUSIONS:Residents' communication skills specific to surrogate decision-making benefit from focused interventions. Our pilot assessment of a workshop showed promise, and additionally demonstrated the feasibility of bringing OSCEs and simulated encounters into a busy clinical practice.

Chalk talks-where the teacher is equipped solely with a writing utensil and a writing surface have been used for centuries, yet little has been written about strategies for their use in medical education. Structured education proximal to patient encounters (during rounds, at the bedside, or in between patients in clinic) maximizes the opportunities for clinical learning. This paper presents a strategy to bring mini-chalk talks (MCTs) to the bedside as a practical way to provide relevant clinical teaching by visually framing teachable moments. Grounded in adult learning theory, MCTs leverage teaching scripts to facilitate discussion, involve learners at multiple levels, and embrace the increased retention associated with visual aids. These authors provide specific recommendations for the design and implementation of MCT sessions including what topics work well, how to prepare, and how to involve and engage the learners.

In this article, the authors reexamine the Ambulatory Diagnostic and Treatment Center (ADTC) model, which uniquely combines the education of trainees with the care of referred patients at one Veterans Affairs medical center. As an ambulatory clinic with an inpatient mind-set, the ADTC uses a series of closely spaced outpatient appointments that are longer than typical ambulatory visits, offering a VIP-level of evaluation with the patient-centered goal of expedited diagnosis and treatment. Faculty triage patients by weighing factors such as urgency, educational value, complexity, and instability of diseases in conjunction with the resources, availability, and appropriateness of other services within the medical center.The ADTC's unique focus on the education of trainees in comparison with other clinical rotations is evident in the ratio of learning to patient care. This intensive training environment expects postgraduate year 2 and 3 internal medicine residents and fourth-year medical students to read, reflect, and review literature daily. This mix of education and care delivery is ripe for reexploration in light of recent calls for curriculum reform amidst headlines exposing delays in veterans' access to care.A low-volume, high-intensity clinic like the ADTC can augment the clinical services provided by a busy primary care and subspecialty workforce without losing its emphasis on education. Other academic health centers can learn from this model and adapt its structure in settings where accountable care organizations and education meet.

Background: Electronic consultations (e-consults) offer rapid access to specialist input without the need for a patient visit. E-consult implementation began in 2011 at VA Boston Healthcare System (VABHS). By early 2013, e-consults were available for all clinical services. In this implementation, the requesting clinician selects the desired consultation within the electronic health record (EHR) ordering menu, which creates an electronic form that is pre-populated with patient demographic information and allows free-text entry of the reason for consult. This triggers a message to the requesting clinician and requested specialty, thereby enabling bidirectional clinician-clinician communication.Objective: The aim of this study is to examine the utilization of e-consults in a large Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system.Methods: Data from the electronic health record was used to measure frequency of e-consult use by provider type (physician or nurse practitioner (NP) and/or physician assistant), and by the requesting and responding specialty from January 2012 to December 2013. We conducted chart reviews for a purposive sample of e-consults and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of clinicians and hospital leaders to better characterize the process, challenges, and usability of e-consults.Results: A total of 7097 e-consults were identified, 1998 from 2012 and 5099 from 2013. More than one quarter (27.56%, 1956/7097) of the e-consult requests originated from VA facilities in New England other than VABHS and were excluded from subsequent analysis. Within the VABHS e-consults (72.44%, 5141/7097), variability in frequency and use of e-consults across provider types and specialties was found. A total of 64 NPs requested 2407 e-consults (median 12.5, range 1-415). In contrast, 448 physicians (including residents and fellows) requested 2349 e-consults (median 2, range 1-116). More than one third (37.35%, 1920/5141) of e-consults were sent from primary care to specialists. While most e-consults reflected a request for specialist input to a generalist's question in diagnosis or management in the ambulatory setting, we identified creative uses of e-consults, including requests for face-to-face appointments and documentation of pre-operative chart reviews; moreover, 7.00% (360/5141) of the e-consults originated from our sub-acute and chronic care inpatient units. In interviews, requesting providers reported high utility and usability. Specialists recognized the value of e-consults but expressed concerns about additional workload.Conclusions: The e-consult mechanism is frequently utilized for its initial intended purpose. It has also been adopted for unexpected clinical and administrative uses, developing into a "disruptive innovation" and highlighting existing gaps in mechanisms for provider communication. Further investigation is needed to characterize optimal utilization of e-consults within specialty and the medical center, and what features of the e-consult program, other than volume, represent valid measures of access and quality care.

Background We define electronic consultations (“e-consults”) as asynchronous, consultative, provider-to-provider communications within a shared electronic health record (EHR) or web-based platform. E-consults are intended to improve access to specialty expertise for patients and providers without the need for a face-to-face visit. Our goal was to systematically review and summarize the literature describing the use and effects of e-consults. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL for studies related to e-consults published between 1990 through December 2014. Three reviewers identified empirical studies and system descriptions, including articles on systems that used a shared EHR or web-based platform, connected providers in the same health system, were used for two-way provider communication, and were text-based. Results Our final review included 27 articles. Twenty-two were research studies and five were system descriptions. Eighteen originated from one of three sites with well-developed e-consult programs. Most studies reported on workflow impact, timeliness of specialty input, and/or provider perceptions of e-consults. E-consultations are used in a variety of ways within and across medical centers. They provide timely access to specialty care and are well-received by primary care providers. Discussion E-consults are feasible in a variety of settings, flexible in their application, and facilitate timely specialty advice. More extensive and rigorous studies are needed to inform the e-consult process and describe its effect on access to specialty visits, cost and clinical outcomes.