Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Secure app-based secondary healthcare clinical decision support to deployed forces in the UK Defence Medical Services
  1. David N Naumann1,
  2. L McMenemy2,3,
  3. A Beaven4,
  4. D M Bowley5,
  5. A Mountain6,
  6. O Bartels7 and
  7. R J Booker8
  1. 1 Academic Department of Military Surgery and Trauma, Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, Birmingham, UK
  2. 2 Institute of Naval Medicine, Defence Medical Services, Gosport, UK
  3. 3 Centre for Blast Injury Studies, Imperial College London, London, UK
  4. 4 Orthopaedics, Army Medical Service 202 Midlands Field Hospital Reserve, Birmingham, UK
  5. 5 Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, Defence Medical Services, Birmingham, UK
  6. 6 Academic Department of Trauma & Orthopaedics, Royal Centre for Defence Medicine, Birmingham, UK
  7. 7 Medical Information Services, HQ Defence Medical Services, Lichfield, UK
  8. 8 Research & Clinical Innovation, HQ Defence Medical Services and jHub-Med, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to R J Booker, Research & Clinical Innovation, HQ Defence Medical Services and jHub-Med, London, UK; richard.booker958{at}


Background Modern instant messaging systems facilitate reach-back medical support for Defence Medical Services (DMS) by connecting deployed clinicians to remote specialists. The mobile app Pando (Forward Clinical, UK) has been used for this purpose by the DMS via the ‘Ask Advice’ function. We aimed to investigate the usage statistics for this technology in its first 1000 days to better understand its role in the DMS.

Methods An observational study was undertaken using metadata extracted from the prospective database within the application server for clinical queries between June 2019 and February 2022. These data included details regarding number and name of specialties, timings, active users per day and the number of conversations.

Results There were 29 specialties, with 298 specialist users and 553 requests for advice. The highest volume of requests were for trauma and orthopaedics (n=116; 21.0%), ear, nose and throat (n=67; 12.1%) and dermatology (n=50; 9.0%). There was a median of 164 (IQR 82–257) users logged in per day (range 2–697). The number of requests during each day correlated with the number of users on that day (r=0.221 (95% CI 0.159 to 0.281); p<0.001). There were more daily users on weekdays than weekends (215 (IQR 123–277) vs 88 (IQR 58–121), respectively; p<0.001). For the top 10 specialties, the median first response time was 9 (IQR 3–42) min and the median time to resolution was 105 (IQR 21–1086) min.

Conclusion In the first 1000 days of secure app-based reach-back by the DMS there have been over 500 conversations, responded to within minutes by multiple specialists. This represents a maturing reach-back capability that may enhance the force multiplying effect of defence healthcare while minimising the deployed ‘medical footprint’. Further discussions should address how this technology can be used to provide appropriately responsive clinical advice within DMS consultant job-planned time.

  • telemedicine
  • world wide web technology
  • information technology
  • information management
  • health informatics

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • X @davidnnaumann, @loumcmenemy

  • Contributors DNN, RJB and DMB designed the study. RJB collected all data and DNN performed data analysis. DNN wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and critical appraisal and revisions were made by all remaining authors. The final version of the manuscript was agreed by all authors. RJB acts as the guarantor.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Map disclaimer The inclusion of any map (including the depiction of any boundaries therein), or of any geographic or locational reference, does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BMJ concerning the legal status of any country, territory, jurisdiction or area or of its authorities. Any such expression remains solely that of the relevant source and is not endorsed by BMJ. Maps are provided without any warranty of any kind, either express or implied.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.