Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37880445›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023

Is there an outcome benefit? Patient engagement technology in addition to the electronic medical record patient portal following elective colorectal surgery.

Alexa D Melucci, Kiersten Flodman, Anthony Loria, Holli L Swanson, Mary K Robinson, Michael J Hasselberg, Lara Evans, Larissa K Temple, Fergal J Fleming

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Alexa D MelucciSurgical Health Outcomes and Research Enterprise (SHORE), Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA. alexa_melucci@urmc.rochester.edu.
Kiersten FlodmanSurgical Health Outcomes and Research Enterprise (SHORE), Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Anthony LoriaSurgical Health Outcomes and Research Enterprise (SHORE), Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Holli L SwansonDivision of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Mary K RobinsonDivision of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Michael J HasselbergDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Lara EvansDepartment of Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Larissa K TempleSurgical Health Outcomes and Research Enterprise (SHORE), Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Fergal J FlemingSurgical Health Outcomes and Research Enterprise (SHORE), Department of Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient engagement technologies (PET) are an area of growing innovation and investment, but whether PET use in the setting of electronic medical record (EMR) supported patient portals are associated with improved outcomes is unknown. Therefore, we assessed PET and EMR activation among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery on an enhanced recovery pathway.

methodsWe identified adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 1/2017 and 7/2021. EMR activations were assessed and patients were considered PET users if they used a proprietary PET application. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with PET use and determine whether the level of engagement (percentage of messages read by the patient) was associated with 30-day outcomes.

results484 patients (53.5% PET users, 81.6% with an activated EMR patient portal, 30.8% ≥ 70 years of age) were included. PET users were younger, more likely to have their EMR portal activated and had decreased odds of prolonged length of stay [odds ratio (OR) 0.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4-0.8]. Among patients ≥ 70 years, PET users had reduced odds of readmissions (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.9) compared to PET non-users. The most engaged PET users had decreased morbidity (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.8) and readmissions (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8) compared to the least engaged PET users.

conclusionWhen controlling for EMR activation, patients who use PET, specifically those with higher levels of engagement or aged ≥ 70, have improved outcomes following elective colorectal surgery. Interventions aimed at increasing the adoption of PET among older adults may be warranted.

Indexed as

Colorectal SurgeryPatient PortalsAgedElective Surgical ProceduresElectronic Health RecordsHumansPatient ParticipationColorectal surgeryEnhanced recovery after surgeryMobile health technologyOlder adultsPatient engagement

Identifiers

PMID37880445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.