Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32534969›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology focus2020

Telehealth in Uro-oncology Beyond the Pandemic: Toll or Lifesaver?

Severin Rodler, Maria Apfelbeck, Gerald Bastian Schulz, Troya Ivanova, Alexander Buchner, Michael Staehler, Volker Heinemann, Christian Stief, Jozefina Casuscelli

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology focus, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Virtual Care in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Association of Cancer History with COVID-19 Risk and Outcomes among Older Postmenopausal Women: Results from the Women's Health Initiative.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Virtual medicine in urology: Is it here to stay?Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Perspectives of older women with early breast cancer on telemedicine during post-primary treatment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Severin RodlerKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: severin.rodler@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Maria ApfelbeckKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Gerald Bastian SchulzKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Troya IvanovaKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Alexander BuchnerKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Michael StaehlerKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Volker HeinemannComprehensive Cancer Center, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany; Medizinische Klinik III, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Christian StiefKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Jozefina CasuscelliKlinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany; Comprehensive Cancer Center, Klinikum der Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie · DELMU Klinikum · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelehealth services are rapidly embraced in uro-oncology due to the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

objectiveTo determine patients' perspective on adoption of telehealth as a response to the pandemic and its sustainability in the future. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsFollowing a COVID-19 outbreak, 101 patients with advanced genitourinary cancers are currently managed "virtually" for therapy administration at our tertiary care unit. They were surveyed about the current situation, and current and long-term employment of telehealth.

interventionRapid implementation of virtual patient management. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Patients' perception of anxiety of COVID-19 and cancer, perspective on telehealth measures as a reaction to the current COVID-19 pandemic, and long-term acceptance were used as outcomes. Wilcoxon matched-pair signed rank test, chi-square test, and Mann-Whitney U test were performed. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of 101 patients, 92 answered the questionnaire, with 71 (77.2%) responding virtually by e-mail or phone call. Anxiety of cancer (6/10, interquartile range [IQR] 3-8) superseded that of COVID-19 (four/10, IQR 2-5.25, p<0.001), and patients oppose temporary treatment interruption. Of the patients, 66.0% perceive their susceptibility to COVID-19 as equal to or lower than the general population and 52.2% believe that COVID-19 will not affect their therapy. In future, patients (62.6%) prefer to maintain in-person appointments as opposed to complete remote care, but accept remote care during the pandemic (eight/10, IQR 5-9). Beyond the crisis, maintaining telehealth has low preference rates (four/10, IQR 2-7), with high acceptance for external laboratory controls (60.9%) and online visit management (48.9%), but lower acceptance for remote treatment planning including staging discussions (44.6%) and for referral to secondary care oncologists (17.4%).

conclusionsDespite the pandemic, cancer remains the key concern and patients are not willing to compromise on their treatment. Rapid implementation of telehealth is tolerated well during the need of social distancing, with a clear "red line" concerning changes in existing patient-physician relationships. Balancing future implementation of telehealth while considering patients' demand for personal relationships will ensure human dignity in uro-oncology. PATIENT SUMMARY: We queried patients with genitourinary cancers treated in an almost virtual setting following a local coronavirus outbreak. Acceptance of telehealth during the current situation is high; however, long-term implementation of the adapted services is less favored. We deduce that patient-physician relationship is crucial for cancer patients and needs to be balanced against measures for social distancing to forge the future management.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient PreferenceTelemedicineUrologyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnxietyBetacoronavirusCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FemaleHumansKidney NeoplasmsMaleCOVID-19Patient perspectiveTelehealthUro-oncology

Identifiers

PMID32534969
PMCPMC7286644
OpenAlexW3033343809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.