Rebecca J Schneyer, Raanan Meyer, Kacey M Hamilton, Mireille D Truong, Kelly N Wright, Matthew T Siedhoff
{"title":"独家虚拟术前评估对妇科手术并发症的影响。","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":"{\"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}","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
摘要
研究目的:评估虚拟与面对面的术前评估对微创妇科手术(MIGS)围手术期并发症发生率的影响。设计:回顾性队列研究。背景:美国四级医疗学术医院。参与者:2016年1月至2023年5月期间接受MIGS外科医生手术的患者。干预措施:患者接受面对面或虚拟术前访问(定义为初始咨询和任何后续随访或术前咨询访问)。同时进行面对面和虚拟术前访问的患者被排除在外。比较虚拟队列和现场队列的并发症发生率,并进行逻辑回归以调整潜在的混杂因素。结果:分析包括2947例患者,1196例(40.6%)患者进行完全虚拟术前就诊,1751例(59.4%)患者进行完全面对面就诊。自2020年3月实施远程医疗以来,80.6%的患者通过视频会议进行了所有术前访问。手术方式包括常规腹腔镜(78.8%)、机器人辅助腹腔镜(3.8%)、剖腹手术(2.1%)和其他不经腹部进入的妇科手术(15.3%)。最常见的手术是子宫内膜异位症切除术(43.1%)、子宫肌瘤切除术(34.0%)和子宫切除术(24.8%)。队列间围手术期综合并发症发生率相似(虚拟5.9% vs.面对面6.3%,调整优势比[aOR] 0.83, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.58-1.17)。主要并发症(2.3%虚拟vs. 1.2%面对面,aOR 1.52, 95% CI 0.85-2.74)或轻微并发症(5.7%虚拟vs. 6.1%面对面,aOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.59-1.19)无显著差异。两组转换为剖腹手术的情况都很少见(0.1%虚拟vs. 0.2%面对面)。结论:在MIGS实践中实施虚拟术前访问不会影响复合手术并发症的发生率。对于亚专科妇科外科医生,虚拟术前评估可以提供一个安全的替代传统的亲自访问。
The Impact of Exclusively Virtual Preoperative Evaluation on Complications of Gynecologic Surgery.
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.