ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Patient satisfaction in virtual upper-limb orthopaedic clinics: a retrospective review.
Article in BMJ open quality, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic halted elective orthopaedic surgeries, necessitating alternative consultation methods. Virtual consultations emerged as a solution to manage elective waiting lists for conditions such as carpal tunnel syndrome, stenosing tenosynovitis and Dupuytren's contractures. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and patient satisfaction of virtual consultations in an upper-limb orthopaedic clinic. LOCAL PROBLEM: Elective waiting lists for conditions such as carpal tunnel syndrome, stenosing tenosynovitis and Dupuytren's contractures increased significantly, requiring alternative consultation methods.
methodsThe Virtual Upper-Limb Clinic was composed of a virtual consultation, which included a focused history and examination. If there is uncertainty of diagnosis or a lack of appropriate examination findings at that time, the patient would then be booked into an in-person clinic for further assessment.If the virtual examination demonstrated marked pathology, surgical treatment would be proposed. Patients accepting surgical management were assessed and diagnosed formally on the day of surgery, followed by another virtual consultation postoperatively. The aim of this study is to demonstrate overall advantages and patient experiences of the virtual clinic. Data were collected in a retrospective manner using an improvised questionnaire based on the Telehealth Satisfaction Scale.
interventionsPatients received focused history and examination assessments via video consultation. Surgical treatment was carried out electively if required, followed by a postoperative virtual review.
resultsFifty patients were included, predominantly female, with an average age of 57.48 years. Diagnoses included 25 carpal tunnel cases, 15 trigger fingers, two ganglion cysts and eight Dupuytren's contractures. Ninety-six per cent of patients were satisfied with the virtual service, citing reduced travel costs and convenience. However, only 54% preferred virtual consultations preoperatively.
conclusionsVirtual upper-limb orthopaedic clinics provide a safe, cost-effective and satisfactory alternative to in-person care. However, preferences varied, underscoring the need for a hybrid model integrating virtual and in-person consultations based on clinical and patient needs.
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.