Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25381774›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2014

The effectiveness of telemedicine for paediatric retrieval consultations: rationale and study design for a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Nigel R Armfield, Mark G Coulthard, Anthony Slater, Julie McEniery, Mark Elcock, Robert S Ware, Paul A Scuffham, Mark E Bensink, Anthony C Smith

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Telehealth in Primary Health Care: A Scoping Review of the Literature.Perspectives in health information managemen · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Nigel R ArmfieldCentre for Online Health, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. N.R.Armfield@uq.edu.au.
Mark G CoulthardQueensland Children's Medical Research Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Mark.Coulthard@health.qld.gov.au.
Anthony SlaterPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Royal Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. Anthony.Slater@health.qld.gov.au.
Julie McEnieryPaediatric Intensive Care Unit, Royal Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. Julie.McEniery@health.qld.gov.au.
Mark ElcockRetrieval Services Queensland, Department of Health, Brisbane, Australia. Mark.Elcock@health.qld.gov.au.
Robert S WareQueensland Children's Medical Research Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. R.Ware@sph.uq.edu.au.
Paul A ScuffhamGriffith Health Institute, School of Medicine, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. P.Scuffham@griffith.edu.au.
Mark E BensinkCentre for Online Health, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. MBensink@live.com.
Anthony C SmithCentre for Online Health, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. asmith@uq.edu.au.
University of Queensland · AURoyal Children's Hospital · AUChildren's Medical Research Institute · AUGriffith University · AUQueensland Children’s Medical Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn many health systems, specialist services for critically ill children are typically regionalised or centralised. Studies have shown that high-risk paediatric patients have improved survival when managed in specialist centres and that volume of cases is a predictor of care quality. In acute cases where distance and time impede access to specialist care, clinical advice may be provided remotely by telephone. Emergency retrieval services, attended by medical and nursing staff may be used to transport patients to specialist centres. Even with the best quality retrieval services, stabilisation of the patient and transport logistics may delay evacuation to definitive care. Several studies have examined the use of telemedicine for providing specialist consultations for critically ill children. However, no studies have yet formally examined the clinical effectiveness and economic implications of using telemedicine in the context of paediatric patient retrieval. METHODS/

designThe study is a pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial running over 24 months which will compare the use of telemedicine with the use of the telephone for paediatric retrieval consultations between four referring hospitals and a tertiary paediatric intensive care unit. We aim to recruit 160 children for whom a specialist retrieval consultation is required. The primary outcome measure is stabilisation time (time spent on site at the referring hospital by the retrieval team) adjusted for initial risk. Secondary outcome measures are change in patient's physiological status (repeated measure, two time points) scored using the Children's Emergency Warning Tool; change in diagnosis (repeated measure taken at three time points); change in destination of retrieved patients at the tertiary hospital (general ward or paediatric intensive care unit); retrieval decision, and length of stay in the Paediatric Intensive Care Unit for retrieved patients. The trial has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committees of Children's Health Services Queensland and The University of Queensland, Australia. DISCUSSION: Health services are adopting telemedicine, however formal evidence to support its use in paediatric acute care is limited. Generalisable evidence is required to inform clinical use and health system policy relating to the effectiveness and economic implications of the use in telemedicine in paediatric retrieval.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612000156886 .

Indexed as

TelephoneAdolescentAustraliaChildChild Health ServicesChild, PreschoolCritical CareEmergenciesEmergency Medical ServicesFemaleHumansInfantInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, PediatricMaleNew Zealand

Identifiers

PMID25381774
PMCPMC4232675
OpenAlexW2073442535

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.