ArticleUrology2021
Implementation of a Ureteric Colic Telemedicine Service: A Mixed Methods Quality Improvement Study.
Article in Urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of Telehealth Outcome Categories for Patient Safety: Systematic Literature Review.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Pooled it
- Delayed surgery for localised and metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis for the COVID-19 pandemic.World journal of urology · 2021Pooled it
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Patients with Urolithiasis Regarding Stone Examination Methods: A Cross-Sectional Study in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Telemedicine-Based Virtual Stone Clinics for Renal Colic: Cost-Benefit Insights and Adoption Barriers.Cureus · 2025Review
- Telemedicine in Endourology for Patient Management and Healthcare Delivery: Current Status and Future Perspectives.Current urology reports · 2024Review
- Telemedicine use in current urologic oncology clinical practice.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Telemedicine and Telehealth in Urology: Uptake, Impact and Barriers to Clinical Adoption.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Telemedicine and Telehealth in Urology-What Do the 'Patients' Think About It?Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- One Year on: An Overview of Singapore's Response to COVID-19-What We Did, How We Fared, How We Can Move Forward.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the effectiveness of a telemedicine service for ureteric colic patients in reducing the number of unnecessary face-to-face consultations and shortening waiting time for appointments.
methodsA telemedicine workflow was implemented as a quality improvement study using the Plan-Do-Study-Act method. All patients presenting with ureteric colic without high-risk features of fever, severe pain, and hydronephrosis, were recruited, and face-to-face appointments to review scan results were replaced with phone consultations. Data were prospectively collected over 3 years (January 2017 to December 2019). Patient outcomes including the reduction in face-to-face review visits, time to review, reattendance and intervention rates, were tracked in an interrupted time-series analysis, and qualitative feedback was obtained from patients and clinicians.
resultsAround 53.2% of patients presenting with ureteric colic were recruited into the telemedicine workflow. A total of 465 patients (46.2%) had normal scan results and 250 patients (24.9%) did not attend their scan appointments, hence reducing the number of face-to-face consultations by 71.1%. A total of 230 patients (22.9%) required subsequent follow-up with urology, while 61 patients (6.1%) were referred to other specialties. Mean (SD) time to review was 30.0 (6.2) days, 6-month intervention rate was 3.4% (n = 34) and unplanned reattendance rate was 3.2% (n = 32). Around 93.1% of patients reported satisfaction with the service.
conclusionThe ureteric colic telemedicine service successfully and sustainably reduced the number of face-to-face consultations and time to review without compromising on patient safety. The availability of this telemedicine service has become even more important in helping us provide care to patients with ureteric colic in the current COVID-19 pandemic.
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.