Rebecca J Schneyer, Raanan Meyer, Kacey M Hamilton, Mireille D Truong, Kelly N Wright, Matthew T Siedhoff
{"title":"The Impact of Exclusively Virtual Preoperative Evaluation on Complications of Gynecologic Surgery.","authors":"Rebecca J Schneyer, Raanan Meyer, Kacey M Hamilton, Mireille D Truong, Kelly N Wright, Matthew T Siedhoff","doi":"10.1016/j.jmig.2024.11.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study objective: </strong>To evaluate the impact of virtual versus in-person preoperative evaluation on perioperative complication rates in a minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS) practice.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Quaternary care academic hospital in the United States.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Patients who underwent surgery with a MIGS surgeon between January 2016 and May 2023.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Patients underwent either in-person or virtual preoperative visits (defined as the initial consultation and any subsequent follow-up or preoperative counseling visits). Those who had both an in-person and virtual preoperative visit were excluded. Complication rates among the virtual and in-person cohorts were compared, and logistic regression was performed to adjust for potential confounders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 2,947 patients, 1196 (40.6%) with exclusively virtual preoperative visits and 1751 (59.4%) with exclusively in-person visits. Following the implementation of telemedicine in 3/2020, 80.6% of patients had all their preoperative visits conducted virtually via videoconference. Surgical approach included conventional laparoscopy (78.8%), robotic-assisted laparoscopy (3.8%), laparotomy (2.1%), and other gynecologic procedures without abdominal entry (15.3%). The most common procedures were endometriosis excision (43.1%), myomectomy (34.0%), and hysterectomy (24.8%). Composite perioperative complication rates were similar between cohorts (5.9% virtual vs 6.3% in-person, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-1.17). There were no significant differences for major complications (2.3% virtual vs 1.2% in-person, aOR 1.52, 95% CI 0.85-2.74) or minor complications (5.7% virtual vs 6.1% in-person, aOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.59-1.19). Conversion to laparotomy was rare in both groups (0.1% virtual vs 0.2% in-person).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementation of virtual preoperative visits within a MIGS practice did not impact composite surgical complication rates. For subspecialized gynecologic surgeons, a virtual preoperative evaluation may offer a safe alternative to the traditional in-person visit.</p>","PeriodicalId":16397,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2024.11.012","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study objective: To evaluate the impact of virtual versus in-person preoperative evaluation on perioperative complication rates in a minimally invasive gynecologic surgery (MIGS) practice.
Design: Retrospective cohort study.
Setting: Quaternary care academic hospital in the United States.
Participants: Patients who underwent surgery with a MIGS surgeon between January 2016 and May 2023.
Interventions: Patients underwent either in-person or virtual preoperative visits (defined as the initial consultation and any subsequent follow-up or preoperative counseling visits). Those who had both an in-person and virtual preoperative visit were excluded. Complication rates among the virtual and in-person cohorts were compared, and logistic regression was performed to adjust for potential confounders.
Results: The analysis included 2,947 patients, 1196 (40.6%) with exclusively virtual preoperative visits and 1751 (59.4%) with exclusively in-person visits. Following the implementation of telemedicine in 3/2020, 80.6% of patients had all their preoperative visits conducted virtually via videoconference. Surgical approach included conventional laparoscopy (78.8%), robotic-assisted laparoscopy (3.8%), laparotomy (2.1%), and other gynecologic procedures without abdominal entry (15.3%). The most common procedures were endometriosis excision (43.1%), myomectomy (34.0%), and hysterectomy (24.8%). Composite perioperative complication rates were similar between cohorts (5.9% virtual vs 6.3% in-person, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-1.17). There were no significant differences for major complications (2.3% virtual vs 1.2% in-person, aOR 1.52, 95% CI 0.85-2.74) or minor complications (5.7% virtual vs 6.1% in-person, aOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.59-1.19). Conversion to laparotomy was rare in both groups (0.1% virtual vs 0.2% in-person).
Conclusion: Implementation of virtual preoperative visits within a MIGS practice did not impact composite surgical complication rates. For subspecialized gynecologic surgeons, a virtual preoperative evaluation may offer a safe alternative to the traditional in-person visit.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology, formerly titled The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, is an international clinical forum for the exchange and dissemination of ideas, findings and techniques relevant to gynecologic endoscopy and other minimally invasive procedures. The Journal, which presents research, clinical opinions and case reports from the brightest minds in gynecologic surgery, is an authoritative source informing practicing physicians of the latest, cutting-edge developments occurring in this emerging field.