ArticleCureus2024
Improvement in Adherance to Anesthesia Preoperative Appointment With Telemedicine: A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAmidst the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the sudden demand for virtual medical visits drove the expansion of telemedicine across all medical specialties. Current literature demonstrates limited knowledge of the impact of telehealth on appointment adherence, particularly in preoperative anesthesia evaluations. This study aims to describe the impact of telemedicine-based anesthesia evaluation and its effects on appointment completion. Methods: This was a retrospective, non-randomized, cohort study of adult patients at the University of California, Los Angeles, United States, who received preoperative anesthesia evaluations by telemedicine or in-person in an academic medical center. From January to September 2021, we evaluated telemedicine and in-person appointment completion in patients scheduled for surgery. The primary outcome was the incidence of appointment completion. The secondary outcomes included appointment no-shows and cancellations. Results: Of 1332 patients included in this study, 956 patients received telehealth visits while 376 patients received in-person preoperative anesthesia evaluations. Compared to the in-person group, the telemedicine group had more appointment completions (81.38% vs 76.60%), fewer cancellations (12.55% vs 19.41%), and no statistical difference in appointment no-shows (6.07% vs 3.99%). Compared to the in-person group, patients who received telemedicine evaluations were younger (55.81 ± 18.38 vs 65.97 ± 15.19), less likely Native American and Alaska Native (0.31% vs 1.60%), more likely of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (16.63% vs 12.23%), required less interpreter services (4.18% vs 9.31%), had more private insurance coverage (53.45% vs 37.50%) and less Medicare coverage (37.03% vs 50.53%).
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that telemedicine can improve preoperative anesthesia appointment completion and decrease appointment cancellations. We also demonstrate potential shortcomings of telemedicine in serving patients who are older, require interpreter services, or are non-privately insured. These inequities highlight potential avenues to increase equity and access to telemedicine.
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.