ArticleIrish journal of medical science2024
Outcomes and patient perspectives of a novel virtual spinal referral pathway in a non-specialist centre.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Role and impact of telemedicine in spine surgery: a systematic review.EFORT open reviews · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn Irish orthopaedic centres without dedicated spinal services, the care of patients is facilitated through tertiary referral centres in Dublin, Cork & Galway. The outpatient waiting list for elective spinal opinion remains lengthy and challenging. Previous practice in University Hospital Waterford (UHW) necessitated an assessment with a local non-spinal orthopaedic specialist following a GP referral, incurring up to a 2-year wait prior to subspecialist spinal referral. These patients subsequently incurred a further wait for an appointment at the tertiary referral centre. A novel virtual spine clinic in collaboration with the Mater Misericordiae University Hospital (MMUH) was developed to fast-track this process. AIMS AND
methodsA retrospective study was performed to audit efficiency by assessing time to initial consultation and time to virtual consultation, treatment outcomes, and patient satisfaction using an adapted patient-satisfaction questionnaire (PSQ-18) and a semi-structured interview. This study reflected the unique nature of patient experience in this pathway.
resultsThe median time from referral to being seen in an in-person rapid access physiotherapist combined orthopaedic clinic was 185 days. The median time from initial consultation to virtual consultation was 36 days. The median time interval from virtual consultation to intervention was 110 days. Twenty percent of patients underwent surgery, 14% were further seen in the MMUH outpatients, 7% managed with the trial of physiotherapy, 7% required no follow-up, and 50% planned for radiologically guided spinal injections. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionThis novel pathway is efficient for orthopaedic units without a dedicated spinal service. This can easily be replicated across other orthopaedic centres with minimal cost implications.
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.