MedElevator
Войти в исследования Urogynecology (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026
Follow-up After Urogynecologic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Roberts Brittany L, Leong Karissa A, Carlton Caitlin E, Jacobs Bradley E, Halder Gabriela E, Springer-Miller Ryan, Pollack Bracha, Drugge Elizabeth, Rogers Rebecca G, Grimes Cara L
Аннотация
IMPORTANCE: Postoperative follow-up is critical in patient recovery, complication detection, and optimizing patient outcomes. Although traditionally, in-office postoperative visits have been the standard of care, remote postoperative follow-up via telehealth has emerged as a comparable alternative.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to systematically review the literature comparing in-office and remote (telehealth visits, phone calls, or apps) postoperative follow-up after urogynecologic surgery to assess the effect on patient satisfaction, health care utilization, and adverse events.
STUDY DESIGN: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through January 14, 2025. The population comprised women undergoing urogynecologic surgery, comparing remote follow-up methods with standard in-office visits. Outcomes assessed were patient satisfaction, health care utilization (unscheduled visits, patient-initiated calls, emergency department visits), and adverse events (eg, mesh complications, urinary retention, urinary tract infections). Abstracts and full-text articles were doubly screened and doubly extracted, with study quality graded using GRADE criteria and Cochrane risk of bias assessments. Meta-analyses were conducted for pooled proportions and mean ratios.
RESULTS: Of 1,082 abstracts screened, 9 studies (5 randomized controlled trials, 4 retrospective studies) involving 1,270 patients were included, with 490 patients receiving remote visits and 333 receiving in-office visits. Evidence quality ranged from moderate to high. In the meta-analysis, in-office and remote follow-up had comparable patient satisfaction (89% vs 78%, P =0.30), with no significant mean difference in patient satisfaction scores (mean difference: 0, P =0.70). No difference in health care utilization metrics or adverse events (15% vs 12%, P =0.664) was found.
CONCLUSIONS: Remote postoperative follow-up after urogynecologic surgery demonstrated no significant differences from in-office visits regarding patient satisfaction, health care utilization, or adverse events, supporting telehealth as an effective alternative to in-office visits.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to systematically review the literature comparing in-office and remote (telehealth visits, phone calls, or apps) postoperative follow-up after urogynecologic surgery to assess the effect on patient satisfaction, health care utilization, and adverse events.
STUDY DESIGN: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through January 14, 2025. The population comprised women undergoing urogynecologic surgery, comparing remote follow-up methods with standard in-office visits. Outcomes assessed were patient satisfaction, health care utilization (unscheduled visits, patient-initiated calls, emergency department visits), and adverse events (eg, mesh complications, urinary retention, urinary tract infections). Abstracts and full-text articles were doubly screened and doubly extracted, with study quality graded using GRADE criteria and Cochrane risk of bias assessments. Meta-analyses were conducted for pooled proportions and mean ratios.
RESULTS: Of 1,082 abstracts screened, 9 studies (5 randomized controlled trials, 4 retrospective studies) involving 1,270 patients were included, with 490 patients receiving remote visits and 333 receiving in-office visits. Evidence quality ranged from moderate to high. In the meta-analysis, in-office and remote follow-up had comparable patient satisfaction (89% vs 78%, P =0.30), with no significant mean difference in patient satisfaction scores (mean difference: 0, P =0.70). No difference in health care utilization metrics or adverse events (15% vs 12%, P =0.664) was found.
CONCLUSIONS: Remote postoperative follow-up after urogynecologic surgery demonstrated no significant differences from in-office visits regarding patient satisfaction, health care utilization, or adverse events, supporting telehealth as an effective alternative to in-office visits.