ArticleJTCVS open2025
Influence of patient engagement technology on reported perioperative experiences of patients undergoing lung resection.
Article in JTCVS open, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Patient engagement technologies (PETs) are web-based platforms that provide a means to collect patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as well as guide patients through their surgical journey. The optimal method for collecting PROs is unknown. PROs are an important measure of health care quality We sought to describe the experience of patients undergoing lung resection at our institution using an app-based PET platform. Methods: Patients undergoing elective lung resection surgery from 2019 to 2023 who enrolled with a PET were identified. Patients received educational content; health checks; and surveys, including the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global-10 and EuroQOL 5 Dimension surveys. Descriptive statistics were employed to determine utilization and initial observations. Results: We enrolled 952 patients who underwent lung resection, of whom 88% (838 out of 952) activated the PET and completed the setup survey. More than half (436 out of 838) of patients were women and 68% (229 out of 335) had adequate health literacy. Preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global-10 and EuroQOL 5 Dimension surveys were completed by 73% (613 out of 838), whereas 37% (309 out of 838) completed an inpatient health check and 39% (325 out of 838) completed a 1-month follow-up survey. Overall, 91% (179 out of 196) reported the PET improved their confidence in postoperative self-care and as a result 86% (169 out of 196) reported feeling less worried about their surgical journey. Use of the PET allowed 39% (77 out of 196) to avoid telephone calls to the hospital care team and 7.6% (15 out of 196) avoided emergency room visits. Conclusions: Patient engagement technologies provide a way to collect PROs. Among patients who utilize PETs in their perioperative care, there is a reported reduction in telephone calls to providers and emergency room visits, promotion of empowerment in self-care, and reduction of anxiety.
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.