ArticleBMC oral health2022
Virtual consultations for oral surgery patients.
Article in BMC oral health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acceptance and readiness for tele-dentistry among dental professionals amidst conflict in Sudan.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- RETRACTED ARTICLE: Establishment of Neural Series Transmission Keys (NSTKs) and Security in the Field of COVID-19 Telepediatric Oral Health.Wireless personal communications · 2023Article
- Relevance of Teledentistry: Brief Report and Future Perspectives.Frontiers in dentistry · 2022Review
- Teledentistry in pediatric dentistry: Postgraduate dental students' knowledge, practice, and attitudes.Digital healthArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFollowing Covid-19, many departments have incorporated teledentistry into practice. As new consultation methods are introduced, it's imperative that patients have as similar an experience with virtual consultations to ensure informed decision-making. This project evaluated patients' perceptions of video consultations and determined if patients seen virtually received the same standard of information by auditing compliance with sending patient information leaflets (PILs) following video consultation.
methodThe department's PILs were used to create an inclusion list for patients requiring a PIL. A retrospective audit assessed the notes of 100 video consultations for records of if PILs were sent and by what method. The department's PILs were digitalised and a clinical mailbox introduced enabling clinicians to email patients a PIL hyperlink. The audit was repeated for 88 video consultations. Patient and staff feedback was gathered via online surveys.
resultsInitially, 51% of cases met the criteria requiring a PIL and 16% of patients were sent PILs. Following mailbox introduction, 53% of cases met the criteria and 94% were sent PILs, 100% via email. Patient and staff feedback was positive regarding video consultations and digital PILS. Technical difficulties were reported in 44% of cases.
conclusionsPatients perceive virtual consultations to be a positive change and the introduction of a mailbox enhances video consultations in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Patient information can be standardised, via digital PILs, regardless of consultation type. As departments implement post-pandemic changes, utilisation of a mailbox can provide multiple improvements to care.
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.