ArticleJournal of telemedicine and telecare2022
Virtual consultation in paediatric urology during the COVID-19 pandemic: The effect of pathology on the outcome.
Article in Journal of telemedicine and telecare, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVirtual consultation (VC) has exponentially increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lessons from using this modality during the pandemic will need to be appraised carefully before integrating it into the routine practice. Some paediatric urology patients can potentially be excellent candidates for routine VC.
objectivesInvestigate the ability of clinicians to make management plans using VCs and identify accordingly the group of patients that can benefit from routine VC. Evaluate the routine use of VC without travel restrictions.
methodsDesigned in two phases. Phase 1, during the lockdown, prospective collection of data after the consultation assessing the clinician satisfaction in making a decision by VC. The results were then divided according to the patient pathology; internal organ pathology (IOP), functional urological pathology (FUP) or external organ pathology (EOP). Data was then analysed to demonstrate if different outcomes can be related to the pathology. Phase 2 after the ease of the lockdown to judge the lessons learnt looking at the same parameters in patients who are selected to receive VC and evaluate journey saved by the patients, measured in miles.
resultsOne hundred and forty-four consultations were assessed. One hundred and fourteen in phase 1 and 30 from phase 2. Mean age 7.2 years. In phase 1, 57% of patients were reviewed by consultants and 72% were followed up. Thirty-seven per cent had IOP, 24.5% FUP and 38.5% EOP. Clinicians were more likely to reach a decision with patients with IOP and FUP DISCUSSION: VC for paediatric urology patients was employed effectively to avoid hospital contact during the lockdown. From the lessons learnt that patients with IOP and FUP can continue to benefit from VC after the ease of lockdown without compromising the decision making. VC is a viable way to structure services in the future for selected paediatric urology conditions.
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.