ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
Phone follow-up after inguinal hernia repair.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital Health Interventions and Patient Safety in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2024Pooled it
- Telemedicine-enabled surveillance after hernia repair: A prospective programmatic experience.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Postoperative outcomes among patients evaluated via telemedicine-based preoperative consultations for small ventral hernias.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Article
- Perioperative Telemedicine Care in Hernia Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cureus · 2025Review
- Mis-identified complications after groin hernia repair: concerns for results, research, and registries?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
- Trans rectus sheath extra-peritoneal procedure (TREPP) for inguinal hernia repair under local anesthesia with sedation in the outpatient clinic: a feasibility study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Telephone assessment of new hernia referrals-is it possible?Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2024Article
- Telemedicine-based new patient consultations for hernia repair and advanced abdominal wall reconstruction.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTypically, in-person follow-up in clinic is utilized after outpatient inguinal hernia repair. Studies have shown that phone follow-up may be successfully used for the detection of postoperative hernia recurrences. However, no studies have evaluated the detection rates of other postoperative complications, such as emergency department visits and readmissions, with the utilization of phone follow-up after inguinal hernia repair. The objective of our study was to investigate the safety of a phone follow-up care pathway following elective, outpatient inguinal hernia repair.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, adult patients who underwent elective, outpatient inguinal hernia repair between 2013 and 2019 at a large academic health system in the Midwest United States were identified from the electronic health record. Patients were categorized by type of postoperative follow-up: in-person or phone follow-up. Baseline demographics, operative, and postoperative data were compared between follow-up groups. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate predictors of having any related emergency department (ED) visit/readmission/reoperation within 90 days.
resultsWe included 2009 patients who underwent elective inguinal hernia repair during the study period. 321 patients had in-person follow-up only, while 1,688 patients had phone follow-up. There was a higher rate of laparoscopic repair in the phone follow-up group (85.4% vs. 53.0% for in-person follow-up). There were no differences in rates of related 90-day ED visits, readmissions, and reoperations between the phone and in-person follow-up groups. On multivariable logistic regression, receipt of phone follow-up was not a predictor of having 90-day ED visits, readmissions, or reoperations (OR 1.30, 95% CI [0.83, 2.05]).
conclusionsPatients who underwent phone follow-up had similarly low rates of adverse outcomes to those with in-person follow-up. Phone follow-up protocols may be implemented as an alternative for patients and provide a means to decrease healthcare utilization following inguinal hernia repair.
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.