Evaluating the shift in psychiatric care: Associations between remote consultation use and clinical outcomes in a large longitudinal cohort

The shift to remote consultations represents a profound change in mental health service delivery, comparable to the historic closure of long-stay institutions, yet it occurred without formal evaluation. We aimed to identify diagnostic groups for whom remote care is safe and those for whom it may carry risk. We conducted a retrospective study assembling five annual cohorts using electronic health records from South London, including adults with psychiatric diagnoses (ICD-10 "F" codes) receiving community/outpatient care between March 2019 and March 2024. We examined associations between 10% increments in the proportion of remote consultation use and five outcomes: psychiatric hospitalisation, psychiatric assessments in emergency care, home treatment team contacts, and clinical mentions of improvement or deterioration. Logistic regression models were adjusted for demographic, social, and clinical factors, and stratified by diagnosis. Based on 106,153 observations across five cohort-years, higher use of remote consultations was not associated with worse outcomes for most psychiatric diagnoses, suggesting that remote care is non-inferior to in-person care. However, greater remote care use in patients with schizophrenia-related disorders (F20-F29) was associated with increased odds of hospitalisation (OR: 1.06 [1.03-1.09]), and emergency assessment (OR: 1.04 [1.01-1.07]). While remote mental health consultations are generally safe, but clinical caution is warranted for schizophrenia-related disorders.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
npj Digital Medicine
Published
2026-06-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-026-02922-w
Primary Topic
Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluating the shift in psychiatric care: Associations between remote consultation use and clinical outcomes in a large longitudinal cohort

Liliana Hidalgo-Padilla, Robert Stewart, Matthew Broadbent, Mariana Pinto da Costa
npj Digital Medicine
Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
article

Evaluating the shift in psychiatric care: Associations between remote consultation use and clinical outcomes in a large longitudinal cohort

Liliana Hidalgo-Padilla, Robert Stewart, Matthew Broadbent, Mariana Pinto da Costa
article en

Abstract

The shift to remote consultations represents a profound change in mental health service delivery, comparable to the historic closure of long-stay institutions, yet it occurred without formal evaluation. We aimed to identify diagnostic groups for whom remote care is safe and those for whom it may carry risk. We conducted a retrospective study assembling five annual cohorts using electronic health records from South London, including adults with psychiatric diagnoses (ICD-10 "F" codes) receiving community/outpatient care between March 2019 and March 2024. We examined associations between 10% increments in the proportion of remote consultation use and five outcomes: psychiatric hospitalisation, psychiatric assessments in emergency care, home treatment team contacts, and clinical mentions of improvement or deterioration. Logistic regression models were adjusted for demographic, social, and clinical factors, and stratified by diagnosis. Based on 106,153 observations across five cohort-years, higher use of remote consultations was not associated with worse outcomes for most psychiatric diagnoses, suggesting that remote care is non-inferior to in-person care. However, greater remote care use in patients with schizophrenia-related disorders (F20-F29) was associated with increased odds of hospitalisation (OR: 1.06 [1.03-1.09]), and emergency assessment (OR: 1.04 [1.01-1.07]). While remote mental health consultations are generally safe, but clinical caution is warranted for schizophrenia-related disorders.

npj Digital Medicine
King's College London (GB), South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, UK Research and Innovation, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Department of Health and Social Care, King's College London, Medical Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration South London, UK Prevention Research Partnership
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.