Literature DB >> 31206221

Clinical, fiscal and environmental benefits of a specialist-led virtual ureteric colic clinic: a prospective study.

Martin J Connor1,2, Saiful Miah2, Marie Alexandra Edison2, James Brittain2, Mitra Kondjin Smith2, Milad Hanna2, Tamer El-Husseiny2, Ranan Dasgupta2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical, fiscal and environmental impact of a specialist-led acute ureteric colic virtual clinic (VC) pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with uncomplicated acute ureteric colic, referred to a single tertiary centre, were prospectively entered into the study over a 4-year period (January 2015-December 2018). Inclusion criteria were: low-dose non-contrast computed tomography of kidneys, ureters and bladder; white blood cell count <16 × 109/L; pain controlled; normal renal function; and no clinical concern. Primary outcomes were: time (days) from referral to VC outcome; VC outcome (discharge, further VC, face-to-face [FTF] clinic, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy [ESWL], ureterorenoscopy [URS], percutaneous nephrolithotomy [PCNL]); and adverse events (sepsis or obstruction). Secondary outcomes were patient and stone demographics, cost and environmental analysis. The minimum follow-up was 3 months.
RESULTS: A total of 1008 patients entered the study, of whom 91.5% (n = 922) were of working age. The median (interquartile range) time from presentation to VC outcome was 2 (4) days. VC outcomes were as follows: 16.3% of patients (n = 164) were discharged; 18.2% (n = 183) were discharged after further VC; 17.2% (n = 173) underwent an intervention; and 48.4% (n = 488) were referred to an FTF clinic. Interventions comprised: PCNL 0.5% (n = 5); ESWL 7.7% (n = 78); and URS 8.9% (n = 90). Stone demographics were as follows: 570 patients (56.5%) had lower, 157 (15.6%) had upper, 96 (9.5%) had mid-ureteric and 163 (16.2%) had renal calculi, and in 22 patients (2.2%) the stones had recently passed. The mean (sd) stone size was 3.5  (2.3) mm. Two adverse events (0.2%) were reported. Introducing a VC saved £145,152 for Clinical Commissioning Groups, the equivalent NHS tariff payment of performing 106 URS procedures or 211 ureteric stent insertions. Overall, 15,085 patient journey kilometres were avoided, equal to 0.70-2.93 metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent production and the need to plant 14.7 trees to achieve carbon balance.
CONCLUSION: A specialist-led acute ureteric colic VC reduced time to treatment decision to a median of 2 days. This creates additional clinic capacity and reduces the fiscal burden of traditional clinics and their associated carbon footprint.
© 2019 The Authors BJU International © 2019 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  #EndoUrology; #UroStone; carbon footprint; telemedicine; ureteric colic; urology virtual clinic

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31206221     DOI: 10.1111/bju.14847

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  12 in total

Review 1.  Does telemedicine reduce the carbon footprint of healthcare? A systematic review.

Authors:  Amy Purohit; James Smith; Arthur Hibble
Journal:  Future Healthc J       Date:  2021-03

Review 2.  How to maximize the efficacy of shockwave lithotripsy.

Authors:  Neophytos Petrides; Safiyah Ismail; Faqar Anjum; Seshadri Sriprasad
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2020-10-30

3.  The environmental impacts of telemedicine in place of face-to-face patient care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ramyadevi Ravindrane; Jay Patel
Journal:  Future Healthc J       Date:  2022-03

4.  A Transparency Checklist for Carbon Footprint Calculations Applied within a Systematic Review of Virtual Care Interventions.

Authors:  Oliver Lange; Julian Plath; Timo F Dziggel; David F Karpa; Mattis Keil; Tom Becker; Wolf H Rogowski
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-06-18       Impact factor: 4.614

5.  Health care in rural areas: proposal of a new telemedicine program assisted from the reference health centers, for a sustainable digitization and its contribution to the carbon footprint reduction.

Authors:  Moncho-Santonja Maria; Aparisi-Navarro Silvia; Defez Garcia Beatriz; Davol Andrew; Peris-Fajarnés Guillermo
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2022-06-28

6.  The provision of prostate cancer patient information leaflets on an electronic tablet: A further step to paperless health-care provision.

Authors:  Saiful Miah; Jonathon Maw; Karl Pang; Vineetha Nair; Satoshi Hori; Alastair Lamb; Alexander Martin; Ola Bratt; Benjamin Lamb; Nimish Shah
Journal:  Urol Ann       Date:  2022-02-15

7.  Telehealth in Urology: A Systematic Review of the Literature. How Much Can Telemedicine Be Useful During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic?

Authors:  Giacomo Novara; Enrico Checcucci; Alessandro Crestani; Alberto Abrate; Francesco Esperto; Nicola Pavan; Cosimo De Nunzio; Antonio Galfano; Gianluca Giannarini; Andrea Gregori; Giovanni Liguori; Riccardo Bartoletti; Francesco Porpiglia; Roberto Mario Scarpa; Alchiede Simonato; Carlo Trombetta; Andrea Tubaro; Vincenzo Ficarra
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2020-06-18       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Implementing telemedicine for the management of benign urologic conditions: a single centre experience in Italy.

Authors:  Enrico Checcucci; Stefano De Luca; Paolo Alessio; Paolo Verri; Stefano Granato; Sabrina De Cillis; Daniele Amparore; Michele Sica; Federico Piramide; Alberto Piana; Gabriele Volpi; Matteo Manfredi; Gabriella Balestra; Riccardo Autorino; Cristian Fiori; Francesco Porpiglia
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 4.226

9.  Telepresence Robots at the Urology and Emergency Department: A Pilot Study Assessing Patients' and Healthcare Workers' Satisfaction.

Authors:  Jens Laigaard; Trine Ungermann Fredskild; Grzegorz Lukasz Fojecki
Journal:  Int J Telemed Appl       Date:  2022-03-15

Review 10.  Where will telemedicine go from here?

Authors:  Katherine Rotker; Danielle Velez
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 7.490

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.