Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33999008›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2021

Telemedicine for Follow-up Management of Patients After Liver Transplantation: Cohort Study.

Min Tian, Bo Wang, Zhao Xue, Dinghui Dong, Xuemin Liu, Rongqian Wu, Liang Yu, Junxi Xiang, Xiaogang Zhang, Xufeng Zhang and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Min TianDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1198-1073
Bo WangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5776-2944
Zhao XueNational Local Joint Engineering Research Center for Precision Surgery & Regenerative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5714-3374
Dinghui DongDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5562-2582
Xuemin LiuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4489-9439
Rongqian WuNational Local Joint Engineering Research Center for Precision Surgery & Regenerative Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0993-4531
Liang YuDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5456-1941
Junxi XiangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7772-3261
Xiaogang ZhangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6197-703X
Xufeng ZhangDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4483-7326
Yi LvDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9438-6765
First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnical capabilities for performing liver transplantation have developed rapidly; however, the lack of available livers has prompted the utilization of edge donor grafts, including those donated after circulatory death, older donors, and hepatic steatosis, thereby rendering it difficult to define optimal clinical outcomes.

objectiveWe aimed to investigate the efficacy of telemedicine for follow-up management after liver transplantation.

methodsTo determine the efficacy of telemedicine for follow-up after liver transplantation, we performed a clinical observation cohort study to evaluate the rate of recovery, readmission rate within 30 days after discharge, mortality, and morbidity. Patients (n=110) who underwent liver transplantation (with livers from organ donation after citizen's death) were randomly assigned to receive either telemedicine-based follow-up management for 2 weeks in addition to the usual care or usual care follow-up only. Patients in the telemedicine group were given a robot free-of-charge for 2 weeks of follow-up. Using the robot, patients interacted daily, for approximately 20 minutes, with transplant specialists who assessed respiratory rate, electrocardiogram, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and blood glucose level; asked patients about immunosuppressant medication use, diet, sleep, gastrointestinal function, exercise, and T-tube drainage; and recommended rehabilitation exercises.

resultsNo differences were detected between patients in the telemedicine group (n=52) and those in the usual care group (n=50) regarding age (P=.17), the model for end-stage liver disease score (MELD, P=.14), operation time (P=.51), blood loss (P=.07), and transfusion volume (P=.13). The length and expenses of the initial hospitalization (P=.03 and P=.049) were lower in the telemedicine group than they were in the usual care follow-up group. The number of patients with MELD score ≥30 before liver transplantation was greater in the usual care follow-up group than that in the telemedicine group. Furthermore, the readmission rate within 30 days after discharge was markedly lower in the telemedicine group than in the usual care follow-up group (P=.02). The postoperative survival rates at 12 months in the telemedicine group and the usual care follow-up group were 94.2% and 90.0% (P=.65), respectively. Warning signs of complications were detected early and treated in time in the telemedicine group. Furthermore, no significant difference was detected in the long-term visit cumulative survival rate between the two groups (P=.50).

conclusionsRapid recovery and markedly lower readmission rates within 30 days after discharge were evident for telemedicine follow-up management of patients post-liver transplantation, which might be due to high-efficiency in perioperative and follow-up management. Moreover, telemedicine follow-up management promotes the self-management and medication adherence, which improves patients' health-related quality of life and facilitates achieving optimal clinical outcomes in post-liver transplantation.

Indexed as

cohorthealth-related quality of lifeliver transplantationmorbiditymortalityoptimal clinical outcomesrapid recoveryremote health monitoringtelehealthtelemedical follow-up management systemtelemedicinetelerobotics

Identifiers

PMID33999008
PMCPMC8167618
OpenAlexW3190897926

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.