SynthesisMedizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin2016
[Telemedicine in the ICU - the possibilities and limitations of an innovation].
Synthesis in Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntensive care medicine is challenged by demographic changes and an increasing number of patient combined with existing shortage of doctors. Telemedicine is a promising approach to ensure patient care in the coming years. Due to a shortage of intensive care physicians in the USA, comprehensive telemedicine coverage has already been established. To date, 11 % of all hospitals are supported by a telemedicine center. The beneficial impact in terms of quality of care, patient safety and economic factors has been confirmed in numerous multicenter studies.
resultsIn the largest multicenter study by Lilly et al., including 107,432 critically ill patients in the intervention group, telemedicine interventions led to a reduced ICU and hospital mortality. In addition, tele-consulting significantly reduced the ICU- and hospital length of stay. These findings were further supported by following studies and metaanalysis, which confirmed these results. The incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia and catheter-associated infections was significantly reduced, when compared to the preintervention group. Furthermore, patient safety and treatment outcomes were improved by increased guideline adherence. Last, the telemedicine intervention significantly decreased the overall treatment costs. These positive results were reproducible even in larger and academic hospitals. At the same time it should be pointed out that a transfer to other health care systems should be considered cautiously in the context of different local infrastructure and culture. Finally, it has to be investigated to what extent the results can be transferred to the health-care situation in Germany.
conclusionPrevious data demonstrated that telemedical support can improve the outcome in critically ill patients, both during hospitalization as well as in the long-term result until the discharge home. Telemedicine is neither a magic bullet nor a replacement for a physician. Instead it is a new type of medical cooperation to further improve the outcomes of critically ill patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.