Trial reportPloS one2018
Evaluating the impact of a 'virtual clinic' on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: A randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Telehealth in Urology: A Systematic Review of the Literature. How Much Can Telemedicine Be Useful During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic?European urology · 2020Pooled it
- Remote Consultations Versus Standard Face-to-Face Appointments for Liver Transplant Patients in Routine Hospital Care: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial of myVideoClinic.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Trial
- Estimating Patient and Family Costs and CO2 Emissions for Telehealth and In-Person Health Care Appointments in British Columbia, Canada: Geospatial Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Telemedicine in Urology: Where Have We Been and Where Are We Heading?European urology open science · 2023Review
- Patient experience of virtual urogynaecology services during Covid-19 pandemic.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- The Association between mHealth App Use and Healthcare Satisfaction among Clients at Outpatient Clinics: A Cross-Sectional Study in Inner Mongolia, China.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- If virtual gynecology clinics are here to stay, we need to include everyone.AJOG global reports · 2022Article
- Telepresence Robots at the Urology and Emergency Department: A Pilot Study Assessing Patients' and Healthcare Workers' Satisfaction.International journal of telemedicine and applications · 2022Article
- Characterising the nationwide burden and predictors of unkept outpatient appointments in the National Health Service in England: A cohort study using a machine learning approach.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- Closing the Virtual Gap in Health Care: A Series of Case Studies Illustrating the Impact of Embedding Evaluation Alongside System Initiatives.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- [Current developments on digitalization : Analysis of quality and economics in healthcare].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2021Review
- Implementing telemedicine for the management of benign urologic conditions: a single centre experience in Italy.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Attend anywhere clinic: A virtual outpatient clinic experience in otolaryngology during the COVID-19 pandemic.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2021Article
- Telemedicine in Peru as a Result of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Perspective from a Country with Limited Internet Access.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2021Article
- Delivering remote consultations: Talking the talk.Musculoskeletal science & practice · 2021Article
- Patient and clinician opinions of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of patients with rare diseases: a qualitative study.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020Article
- A guide for urogynecologic patient care utilizing telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic: review of existing evidence.International urogynecology journal · 2020Review
- Potential Benefits and Drawbacks of Virtual Clinics in General Surgery: Pilot Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR perioperative medicine · 2020Article
- [How did COVID-19 pandemic change the way we attend the patients in an urogynaecological unit].Clinica e investigacion en ginecologia y obstetriciaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of using a 'virtual clinic' on patient experience and cost in the care of women with urinary incontinence. MATERIALS AND
methodsWomen, aged > 18 years referred to a urogynaecology unit were randomised to either (1) A Standard Clinic or (2) A Virtual Clinic. Both groups completed a validated, web-based interactive, patient-reported outome measure (ePAQ-Pelvic Floor), in advance of their appointment followed by either a telephone consultation (Virtual Clinic) or face-to-face consultation (Standard Care). The primary outcome was the mean 'short-term outcome scale' score on the Patient Experience Questionnaire (PEQ). Secondary Outcome Measures included the other domains of the PEQ (Communications, Emotions and Barriers), Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ), Short-Form 12 (SF-12), personal, societal and NHS costs.
results195 women were randomised: 98 received the intervention and 97 received standard care. The primary outcome showed a non-significant difference between the two study arms. No significant differences were also observed on the CSQ and SF-12. However, the intervention group showed significantly higher PEQ domain scores for Communications, Emotions and Barriers (including following adjustment for age and parity). Whilst standard care was overall more cost-effective, this was minimal (£38.04). The virtual clinic also significantly reduced consultation time (10.94 minutes, compared with a mean duration of 25.9 minutes respectively) and consultation costs compared to usual care (£31.75 versus £72.17 respectively), thus presenting potential cost-savings in out-patient management.
conclusionsThe virtual clinical had no impact on the short-term dimension of the PEQ and overall was not as cost-effective as standard care, due to greater clinic re-attendances in this group. In the virtual clinic group, consultation times were briefer, communication experience was enhanced and personal costs lower. For medical conditions of a sensitive or intimate nature, a virtual clinic has potential to support patients to communicate with health professionals about their condition.
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.