ReviewUrology annals
Role, effectiveness, cost efficiency, sustainability, and outcomes of using telemedicine in endourology: A systematic review of literature.
Review in Urology annals. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Randomized Study of a Comfort-Oriented Daytime Double-J Stent Removal Protocol: Effects on Pain, Anxiety, and Patient Satisfaction.Urology research & practice · 2026Article
- Current views on sustainability in urology: findings from the North Central Section of American Urological Association membership survey.Frontiers in urology · 2026Article
- Evolving paradigms in endourology - Toward precision, patient-centeredness, and sustainability.Urology annalsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of telemedicine (TM) in endourology has expanded significantly over the past decade, demonstrating benefits for both patient satisfaction and healthcare efficiency. We wanted to look at the role and effectiveness of using these technological innovations in endourology. A systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses framework and Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome statement. Search was done for all English language articles, over several databases, from inception to Aug 2024. The inclusion criteria focused on studies involving patients with kidney stone disease and reporting outcomes related to healthcare delivery, cost savings, and environmental sustainability (green credentials). A total of 933 articles were initially identified and after screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts, 10 articles were finally included. Of these articles, 8 showed a cost-saving and 9 showed a greener credential of using TM. All included studies showed a positive impact of TM in terms of reduced time to access urology services, enhanced acute and follow-up efficiency, time to decision-making or treatment, patient satisfaction, and safety. Most studies showed more than one clinical and/or organizational benefit in the patient pathway. Our review shows that TM in endourology demonstrates multiple benefits, including cost savings, environmental sustainability, and improved healthcare delivery. The included studies highlight enhanced access to services, faster decision-making, and high patient satisfaction and safety. Given the pressures on the National Health Service and existing waiting times, more should be done to adapt and adopt this technological revolution.
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.