SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Telemedicine in Plastic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Utilization and Outcomes Pre- and Post-pandemic.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTelemedicine revolutionized healthcare post-COVID-19 by expanding virtual care across consultations, post-operative care, and inter-physician collaboration. However, its impact on adoption and effectiveness in plastic surgery remains underexplored. This study systematically compares pre- and post-pandemic telemedicine in plastic surgery, focusing on outcomes, accessibility, and patient satisfaction to inform best practices.
methodsA systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science, following PRISMA guidelines, for articles published through November 2024. Extracted data included author, year, country, subspecialty, pandemic classification, sample size, demographics, utilization, barriers, travel time/distance, satisfaction, complications, and appointment duration. Meta-analyses calculated pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals. Meta-regression and Welch's t-test assessed pre- versus post-pandemic differences. Analyses were performed in R 4.4.1.
resultsOf 450 identified publications, 72 met inclusion criteria, encompassing 9435 subjects (mean age: 47.99). 89.3% (95% CI 59.3-96.2%) of patients reported willingness to reuse telemedicine, and the pooled satisfaction rate was 83.9% (95% CI 79.4-88.5; p < 0.05). Meta-analysis showed significant reductions in travel time (120 min; p < 0.05) and distance (187.1 km; p < 0.05). Five studies reported a mean appointment duration of 16.07 min. Complications were rare (7.7%; 95% CI 2.9-18.6%; p < 0.05). Post-pandemic satisfaction score was lower (81.1 vs. 91.2; p = 0.0315), likely reflecting increased utilization and technological barriers. Other outcomes, including complication rates and willingness to reuse telemedicine, showed no significant difference (p > 0.05).
conclusionTelemedicine plays an evolving role in plastic surgery, reducing travel burden and maintaining safety. However, lower post-pandemic satisfaction highlights the need to improve accessibility and technology to optimize outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
42045685What 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.