RESUMEN
Background: Telemedicine can be defined as the use of telecommunication technology for performing medical acts remotely by health professionals. Currently in anesthesia, teleconsultation (TC) is becoming widespread, although the benefit and quality have not been well evaluated. The objective of this study was to assess the quality, the patient satisfaction, as well as the ecological and medicoeconomic impacts of the preanesthesia TC. Methods: This prospective observational multicentric study was approved by the Société Française d'Anesthésie-Réanimation ethics committee. The study took place from October 2020 to March 2021, in eight French health care institutions. Every adult patient requiring TC before elective surgery could be included. Unavailability of videoconferencing for the patient was the main exclusion criteria. Five hundred three (n) patients, scheduled for surgery, were included. Their files were analyzed for quality, 375 were successfully interviewed for the second part of the study evaluating satisfaction and medicoeconomic impact. The study's evaluation criteria were the quality of the TeleMed-Cs, the satisfaction and comprehension for the patient, and the medicoeconomic impact of a remote evaluation compared with the face-to-face consultation with the surgeon. Results: Of the 503 files, 478 (95%) were reviewed and met all the high authority of health quality criteria. The electronic format of records was associated with higher completion rate. The median satisfaction was 10.0 (IQR 8.25-10.0). The cost of a TC in anesthesia was significantly lower than that of a face-to-face surgical consultation with a median cost of 1.49 (IQR 0.8-1.99) versus 34.81 (IQR 14.01-91.7) p < 0.001. Conclusions: TC in anesthesia seems to be a good alternative in terms of quality, patient satisfaction, and medicoeconomic gain for our patients. By facilitating access to preoperative evaluation, it could be adopted worldwide and thus reduce surgery-related morbidity and mortality in our patients.
Asunto(s)
Anestesia , Consulta Remota , Telemedicina , Adulto , Humanos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare SpeediCath Set to Actreen Set in terms of performance, acceptability and safety, in patients performing self-catheterization. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four questionnaires were completed during this multicentre, randomized, crossover study: initial, after having tested each of the two products and patient preference at the end of the study. RESULTS: Analysis was based on 29 men performing self-catheterization. The SpeediCath Set was found to be superior to the Actreen Set in terms of ease of introduction (p=0.0055), ease of emptying (p=0.0157), quality of lubricant (p<0.0001), urethral tolerance and possibility of catheterization in bed (p= 0.0157). The patients 'global assessment was clearly in favour of SpeediCath Set (70 +/- 2.3 versus 5.7 +/- 2.5; p=0.0156) and 65.5% of patients preferred to use SpeediCath Set in the future. CONCLUSION: SpeediCath Set facilitates catheterization and improves the urethral tolerance compared to Actreen Set, with a marked patient preference in favour of SpeediCath Set.