• J Clin Anesth · Nov 2023

    Effectiveness of a digital vs face-to-face preoperative assessment: A randomized, noninferiority clinical trial.

    • Bastiaan T van Hoorn, Daniel J Tromp, Rosalie C M van Rees, Luke X van Rossenberg, Hanna K Cazemier, Mark van Heijl, and Reinier C Tromp Meesters.
    • Department of General Surgery, University of Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: Bastiaanvanhoorn@gmail.com.
    • J Clin Anesth. 2023 Nov 1; 90: 111192111192.

    Study ObjectiveDigitalizing the preoperative assessment clinic can be a solution to keep up with the growing demand for surgery. It remains unclear if a digital preoperative assessment clinic is as safe, and effective in terms of patient health outcomes and experience compared to face-to-face consultations. This study aimed to compare quality of recovery and mental state in patients undergoing a digital preoperative assessment versus regular face-to-face consultations.DesignThis was a single centre, randomized (1:1), parallel, open-label, noninferiority trial.SettingThe preoperative clinic and preoperative unit of an urban secondary care hospital.PatientsAll adult, Dutch speaking, ASA I-IV patients with access to an online computer who required surgery.InterventionsDigital preoperative screening, consisting of an electronic screening questionnaire and web-based platform with personalized information and recommendations related to the procedure, or face-to-face screening, consisting of two 20-min in-hospital consultations.MeasurementsThe primary endpoint was quality of recovery, measured 48 h after surgery. The analysis followed a per-protocol principle, and only patients who underwent the intended screening were included in the analysis. The noninferiority margin was set at -6. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05535205, during the study on 09/08/2022, before analysing results.Main ResultsBetween March 1, 2021 and 30 august 2021, 480 patients were assessed for eligibility. 400 patients were randomly assigned to the digital group (n = 200) or face-to-face group (n = 201), of which respectively 117 and 124 patients were eventually included in the primary analysis. The mean quality of recovery score of patients undergoing digital screening (158) was non-inferior to that of patients undergoing face-to-face screening (155), with a mean difference of 3·2 points and a 97.5% lower confidence limit of -2.1 points. There were no adverse events.ConclusionsA digital preoperative screening is not inferior to face-to-face consultations in patients undergoing predominantly low to moderate risk surgery. Given its potential to reduce physician workload, reallocate healthcare resources, and lower healthcare costs, a digital preoperative screening may be a better choice for preoperative assessments.Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…