Table 1.

Alternatives to face-to-face consultation: default values for variables in workload model. All values can be altered in the interactive model to test different scenarios and assumptions. Values without citations are authors’ estimates.

Variable		E-consultationa			Telephone			Video
		Base case	Lower value	Upper value	Base case	Lower value	Upper value	Base case	Lower value	Upper value
Access rate: Consultations initially requested in this wayb (%)		90b	0.01 [17]	100	93 [12]	10 [20]	100	90b	50	100
Completion rate
	Digital consultations completed without needing a subsequent consultation (%)	30 [17]	28 [13]	70 [33]c	52 [25,29]	40	90 [20]	65	50	83 [10]
	Of those having a real-time consultation after e-consultation, consultations having phone rather than face-to-face consultation (%)	46 [17]	20	90	N/Ad	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Average time: Average time spent by GPe on this type of consultation (minutes)		4	3	5 [17]	5 [8]	4 [11,15]	6 [29]	9f	6 [21]	15 [34]
Supply-related demand: Alternative form consultations that are new demand (%)		10	–10	30	0 [29]	–10	30	0	–10	30
Total workload resource compared with conventional care, using base case assumptions (%)		25	N/A	N/A	3	N/A	N/A	31	N/A	N/A

^aE-consultation: online consultation.

^bAt present, usage of e-consultation and video consultation in the United Kingdom is generally very low, so the impact is minimal. For the base cases, we have modeled a scenario in which the use of these alternatives is usual.

^cPenza et al report a 66% completion rate [33]. Completion rates of 70% are claimed by eConsult, cited by Marshall et al [2]. Longman reports similar experiences in practices using askmyGP [38].

^dN/A: Not applicable.

^eGP: general practitioner.

^fAssumed to be similar to conventional face-to-face care.