Literature DB >> 33275552

A prospective, multisite study analyzing the percentage of urological cases that can be completely managed by telemedicine.

Bruno Turcotte1, Sophie Paquet1, Anne-Sophie Blais1, Annie-Claude Blouin1, Stéphane Bolduc1, Michel Bureau1, Yves Caumartin1, Jonathan Cloutier1, Marie-Pier Deschênes-Rompré1, Thierry Dujardin1, Yves Fradet1, Louis Lacombe1, Katherine Moore1, Fannie Morin1, Geneviève Nadeau1, David Simonyan2, Frédéric Soucy1, Rabi Tiguert1, Paul Toren1, Michele Lodde1, Frédéric Pouliot1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the development of telemedicine due to confinement measures. However, the percentage of outpatient urological cases that could be managed completely by telemedicine outside of the COVID-19 pandemic remains to be determined. We conducted a prospective, multisite study involving all urologists working in the region of Quebec City.
METHODS: During the first four weeks of the regional confinement, 18 pediatric and adult urologists were asked to determine, after each telemedicine appointment, if it translated into a complete (CCM), incomplete (ICM), or suboptimal case management (SCM, adequate only in the context of the pandemic).
RESULTS: A total of 1679 appointments representing all urological areas were registered. Overall, 67.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 65.3; 69.8), 27.1% (25.0; 29.3), and 4.3% (3.5; 5.4) were reported as CCM, SCM, and ICM, respectively. The CCM ratio varied according to the reason for consultation, with cancer suspicion (52.9% [42.9; 62.8]) and pediatric reasons (38.0% [30.0; 46.6]) showing the lowest CCM percentages. CCM percentages also varied significantly based on the setting where it was performed, ranging from 61.1% (private clinic) to 86.8% (endourology and general hospital).
CONCLUSIONS: We show that two-thirds of all urological outpatient cases could be completely managed by telemedicine outside of the pandemic. After the pandemic, it will be important to incorporate telemedicine as an alternative for a patient's first or followup visit, especially those with geographical, pathological, and socioeconomic considerations.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 33275552      PMCID: PMC7716828          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.6862

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  7 in total

1.  Efficiency, satisfaction, and costs for remote video visits following radical prostatectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Boyd R Viers; Deborah J Lightner; Marcelino E Rivera; Matthew K Tollefson; Stephen A Boorjian; R Jeffrey Karnes; R Houston Thompson; Daniel A O'Neil; Rachel L Hamilton; Matthew R Gardner; Mary Bundrick; Sarah M Jenkins; Sandhya Pruthi; Igor Frank; Matthew T Gettman
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 2.  Ethical practice in Telehealth and Telemedicine.

Authors:  Danielle Chaet; Ron Clearfield; James E Sabin; Kathryn Skimming
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  Telemedicine in Urology: State of the Art.

Authors:  Chandy Ellimoottil; Ted Skolarus; Matthew Gettman; Richard Boxer; Alexander Kutikov; Benjamin R Lee; Jeremy Shelton; Todd Morgan
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 2.649

4.  Patient Perceptions of Telehealth Primary Care Video Visits.

Authors:  Rhea E Powell; Jeffrey M Henstenburg; Grace Cooper; Judd E Hollander; Kristin L Rising
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 5.166

5.  Evaluating the distance travelled for urological pediatric appointments.

Authors:  Samuel Otis-Chapados; Karolane Coderre; Stéphane Bolduc; Katherine Moore
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2019-04-26       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 6.  Telemedicine Online Visits in Urology During the COVID-19 Pandemic-Potential, Risk Factors, and Patients' Perspective.

Authors:  Katharina Boehm; Stefani Ziewers; Maximilian P Brandt; Peter Sparwasser; Maximilian Haack; Franziska Willems; Anita Thomas; Robert Dotzauer; Thomas Höfner; Igor Tsaur; Axel Haferkamp; Hendrik Borgmann
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Teleurology in the Time of Covid-19 Pandemic: Here to Stay?

Authors:  Lorenzo Giuseppe Luciani; Daniele Mattevi; Tommaso Cai; Guido Giusti; Silvia Proietti; Gianni Malossini
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 2.649

  7 in total
  3 in total

1.  Perception and satisfaction of patients after telemedicine urology consultations: A matched analysis with physicians' perspective.

Authors:  Bruno Turcotte; Lynda Bélanger; Anne-Sophie Blais; Annie-Claude Blouin; Stéphane Bolduc; Amélie Bolduc-Mokhtar; Michel Bureau; Yves Caumartin; Jonathan Cloutier; Marie-Pier Deschênes-Rompré; Thierry Dujardin; Yves Fradet; Noémie Gaudreau; Louis Lacombe; Katherine Moore; Fannie Morin; Geneviève Nadeau; Sophie Paquet; Francis Simard; David Simonyan; Frédéric Soucy; Rabi Tiguert; Paul Toren; Michele Lodde; Frédéric Pouliot
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-10       Impact factor: 2.052

2.  Pilot trial of telemedicine in urology: Video vs. telephone consultations.

Authors:  David-Dan Nguyen; Anne Xuan-Lan Nguyen; David Bouhadana; Kahina Bensaadi; François Peloquin; Jean-Baptiste Lattouf; Daniel Liberman; Manon Choinière; Naeem Bhojani
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2022-04       Impact factor: 2.052

3.  Virtual consultation in paediatric urology during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effect of pathology on the outcome.

Authors:  Hesham ElAgami; Benjamin Woodward; Gbenga Awolaran; Varadarajan Kalidasan
Journal:  J Telemed Telecare       Date:  2022-03-07       Impact factor: 6.344

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.