Ear, nose and throat (ENT) conditions are highly prevalent in primary and secondary care, yet patients frequently face prolonged waits for specialist review. In England, over half of ENT patients wait beyond the NHS 18-week referral-to-treatment target. Many of these cases can be effectively managed with advice and non-surgical interventions, presenting an opportunity for remote service innovation.

This study aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, acceptability and environmental sustainability of a digitally enabled remote ENT clinic model compared with traditional face-to-face pathways.

This single-centre, mixed-methods, prospective cohort study will be conducted at University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust. Remote clinics will use trained staff to collect diagnostic data (including endoscopic imaging and boothless hearing tests) for consultant review via secure cloud-based software. Quantitative analysis will assess patient outcomes, costs, waiting times, carbon footprint and satisfaction. Qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with patients, clinicians and managers will explore acceptability, scalability and barriers to implementation. The qualitative data will be analysed using the framework methodology, according to the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread and sustainability framework, while the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology framework will be used to guide the reporting of quantitative data. Cost-effectiveness analyses will follow NICE guidelines, while environmental impact will be measurement will be informed by the sustainability in quality improvement framework. Recruitment will be aiming for 300 completed datasets and 30–35 interviews.

Ethical approval has been granted (IRAS 350908; REC 25/SW/0116). Findings will be disseminated via conferences, peer-reviewed journals and institutional communication channels.

Thanks to the introduction of recent national guidelines for treating herpes simplex virus (HSV) encephalitis, health outcomes have improved. This paper evaluates the health system costs and the health-related quality of life implications of these guidelines.

A sub-analysis of data from a prospective, multi-centre, observational cohort ENCEPH-UK study conducted across 29 hospitals in the UK from 2012 to 2015.

Data for patients aged ≥16 years with a confirmed HSV encephalitis diagnosis admitted for treatment with aciclovir were collected at discharge, 3 and 12 months.

Patient health outcomes were measured by the Glasgow outcome score (GOS), modified ranking score (mRS) and the EuroQoL; healthcare costs were estimated per patient at discharge from hospital and at 12 months follow-up. In addition, Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) were calculated from the EQ-5D utility scores. Cost–utility analysis was performed using the NHS and Social Care perspective.

A total of 49 patients were included; 35 were treated within 48 hours, ‘early’ (median (IQR) 8.25 [3.7–20.5]) and 14 were treated after 48 hours ‘delayed’ (median (IQR) 93.9 [66.7–100.1]). At discharge, 30 (86%) in the early treatment group had a good mRS outcome score (0–3) compared with 4 (29%) in the delayed group. According to GOS, 10 (29%) had a good recovery in the early treatment group, but only 1 (7%) in the delayed group. EQ-5D-3L utility value at discharge was significantly higher for early treatment (0.609 vs 0.221, p

This study suggests that early treatment may be associated with better health outcomes and reduced patient healthcare costs, with a potential for savings to the NHS with faster treatment.