ArticleTelemedicine reports2025
Patient Satisfaction with Remote Pre-Anesthesia Assessment Via Telephone.
Article in Telemedicine reports, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of telemedicine can contribute to patient satisfaction, support hygienic concepts by avoiding physical contact when not required, and reduce waiting and travel time. We aimed to evaluate our recently implemented telemedical approach of remote pre-anesthesia assessment. Methods: We designed a questionnaire to assess patient satisfaction with remote pre-anesthesia assessment procedures, completeness of understanding, and technical feasibility. In total, 250 patients were asked to voluntarily complete the questionnaire after their pre-anesthesia assessment via telephone. Digital anesthesia records were subsequently reviewed for unexpected events and complications to investigate the quality and safety of the approach. Results: Patients included in our study were 51 years old (median, range 18-85 years), mostly female (58%) and had an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status of 1-3 (22.8%, 56.4%, and 20.8%, respectively). Patient satisfaction was high with ratings of "very good" or "good" in over 90% of all questions related to the pre-anesthesia assessment via telephone. Patient's evaluation for the use of telemedicine in general also showed a wide acceptance with 84.4% rating the idea as "very good" (55.6%) or "good" (28.8%). Duration of patient-physician interaction positively correlated with age ( Conclusion: Remote pre-anesthesia assessment via telephone is safe, technically feasible, and satisfactorily accepted in selected patients. These results encourage the continuing implementation of telemedical approaches for pre-anesthesia assessment.
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.