JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2022
Efficacy of Telemedicine Using Videoconferencing Systems in Outpatient Care for Patients With Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Uemoto Yasuaki, Yamanaka Taro, Kataoka Yuki, Wada Yoshitaka, Aoyama Yosuke, Kizawa Rika, Yamaguchi Takeshi, Kikawa Yuichiro, Mukai Hirofumi, Taira Naruto
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of telemedicine (TM) using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer.
METHODS: We searched six electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov) through June 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of TM using videoconferencing systems compared with usual face-to-face care in outpatient care for patients with cancer. We assessed the certainty of evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.
RESULTS: From the 2,400 articles screened, six randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. Two studies evaluated the use of TM in cancer follow-up and four investigated psychotherapy for cancer. TM using videoconferencing systems may result in no differences in primary outcomes such as patient satisfaction (standardized mean difference, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.40) and outpatient attendance complete proportion (risk difference, 0.02%; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.09), and secondary outcomes such as medical professional satisfaction, time devoted to outpatient care, and depression score. The certainty of evidence for these outcomes was low. Although the average money spent on outpatient visit was a primary outcome, the level of evidence was uncertain.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that TM using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer may be as effective as usual face-to-face care. Use of TM more frequently may be considered for patients with cancer who are expected to obtain benefit from TM using videoconference systems.
METHODS: We searched six electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov) through June 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the use of TM using videoconferencing systems compared with usual face-to-face care in outpatient care for patients with cancer. We assessed the certainty of evidence on the basis of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.
RESULTS: From the 2,400 articles screened, six randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. Two studies evaluated the use of TM in cancer follow-up and four investigated psychotherapy for cancer. TM using videoconferencing systems may result in no differences in primary outcomes such as patient satisfaction (standardized mean difference, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.40) and outpatient attendance complete proportion (risk difference, 0.02%; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.09), and secondary outcomes such as medical professional satisfaction, time devoted to outpatient care, and depression score. The certainty of evidence for these outcomes was low. Although the average money spent on outpatient visit was a primary outcome, the level of evidence was uncertain.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that TM using videoconferencing systems in outpatient care for patients with cancer may be as effective as usual face-to-face care. Use of TM more frequently may be considered for patients with cancer who are expected to obtain benefit from TM using videoconference systems.