Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36149744›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Emergency Visits and Hospitalization After Chat Message, Voice Call, or Video Call for Telehealth in Obstetrics and Gynecology Using Telehealth Service User Data in Japan: Cross-sectional Study.

Koichi Sakakibara, Daisuke Shigemi, Rena Toriumi, Ai Ota, Nobuaki Michihata, Hideo Yasunaga

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Koichi SakakibaraDepartment of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7864-4517
Daisuke ShigemiKids Public Inc, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3483-6047
Rena ToriumiKids Public Inc, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6339-6813
Ai OtaKids Public Inc, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-7067-6538
Nobuaki MichihataDepartment of Health Services Research, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-3091-114X
Hideo YasunagaDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economics, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6017-469X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn obstetric and gynecologic practices, synchronous telehealth services via chat message, voice calls, and video calls have been increasingly equipped to improve patients' health care accessibility and clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, differences in clinical outcomes between communication tools remain unknown, especially in terms of safety.

objectiveThis study compared the occurrence of emergency visits and hospitalization after telehealth services through different communication tools, including chat messages, voice calls, and video calls.

methodsWe collected data on obstetric and gynecologic concerns of women who consulted specialized doctors and midwives through a telehealth consulting service in Japan (Sanfujin-ka Online) between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020. The outcomes were emergency visits or hospitalizations at night after the consultation. Chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to compare the clinical outcomes between the groups who received telehealth services via chat message, voice calls, and video calls.

resultsThis study included 3635 participants. The mean age of the participants was 31.4 (SD 5.7) years, and the largest age group (n=2154, 59.3%) was 30-39 years. The numbers (or proportions) of those who received telehealth services via chat message, voice calls, and video calls were 1584 (43.5%), 1947 (53.6%), and 104 (2.9%), respectively. The overall incidence of the outcome was 0.7% (26/3635), including 10 (0.3%) cases of chat message, 16 (0.5%) cases of voice calls, and no video calls. There were no emergency visits that happened due to inappropriate advice. No significant difference in the proportions of the outcomes was observed between the communication tools (P=.55). The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant differences in the outcome between those who used chat message and those who used voice calls (odds ratio 1.63, 95% CI 0.73-3.65).

conclusionsThe communication tools of telehealth services in obstetrics and gynecology did not show a significant difference in terms of emergency visits or hospitalizations after using the service.

Indexed as

GynecologyTelemedicineAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHospitalizationHumansJapanPregnancychat messageeHealthgynecologymHealthmobile healthobstetricssafetytelehealthtelemedicinevideo callvoice call

Identifiers

PMID36149744
PMCPMC9547329

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.