IMPORTANCEOveractive bladder is a condition that may be ideally suited for the use of telemedicine because initial treatment options are behavioral modification and pharmacotherapy.OBJECTIVEWe sought to evaluate if there was an overall difference in patient follow-up rates between telemedicine and in-person visits.STUDY DESIGNNew patients presenting with overactive bladder from July 2020 to March 2021 were randomized into telemedicine and in-person visits groups. A prospective database was maintained to compare follow-up rates, satisfaction rates, and time commitment.RESULTSForty-eight patients were randomized, 23 to the telemedicine group and 25 to the in-person visits group. There was no significant difference in follow-up rates between the telemedicine and in-person follow-up groups at 30 days (39% vs 28%, P = 0.41), 60-days (65% vs 56% P = 0.51) or 90 days (78% vs 60%, P = 0.17). There was no significant difference in satisfaction rates between the 2 groups. There was a significant difference between the average telemedicine visit time and in-person visit time (12.1 ± 6.9 minutes vs 22.8 ± 17.1 minutes; P = 0.02). For in-person visits, the average travel time was 49 minutes (interquartile range, 10–90 minutes) and average miles traveled was 22.1 miles (interquartile range, 10–70 miles).CONCLUSIONSThere was no significant difference in follow-up or satisfaction rates between telemedicine and in-person visits. Telemedicine visits took half the length of time compared with in-person visits. On average, patients in the telemedicine group saved approximately 1 hour per follow-up visit. Telemedicine visits save both the health care provider and patient significant amounts of time without sacrificing patient satisfaction and follow-up rates.
Introduction:As part of its mission to provide the highest standards of clinical care, the AUA publishes guidelines on numerous urological topics. We sought to evaluate the caliber of evidence used establish the currently available AUA guidelines.Methods:All available AUA guideline statements in 2021 were reviewed for their level of evidence and recommendation strength. Statistical analysis was performed to identify differences between oncological and nononcologic topics, and statements pertinent to diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. A multivariate analysis was utilized to identify factors associated with strong recommendations.Results:A total of 939 statements across 29 guidelines were analyzed; 39 (4.2%) were backed by Grade A evidence, 188 (20%) Grade B, 297 (31.6%) Grade C, 185 (19.7%) Clinical Principle, and 230 (24.5%) Expert Opinion. There was a significant association of oncology guidelines (6% vs 3%, P = .021) with more grade A evidence and less Grade C Evidence (24% vs 35%, P = .002). Statements pertaining to diagnosis and evaluation were more likely backed by Clinical Principle (31% vs 14% vs 15%, P < .01), treatment statements backed by B (26% vs 13% vs 11%, P < .01) and C (35% vs 30% vs 17%, P < .01) grade evidence, and follow-up statements backed by Expert Opinion (53% vs 23% vs 24%, P < .01). On multivariate analysis, strong recommendations were more likely supported by high-grade evidence (OR = 12, P < .01).Conclusions:The majority of evidence for the AUA guidelines is not high grade. Additional high-quality urological studies are needed to improve evidence based urological care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.