How effective is video consultation in clinical oncology? A systematic review.
How effective is video consultation in clinical oncology? A systematic review.
复制标题
视频会诊在临床肿瘤学中的效果如何？
DOI：
10.3747/co.v17i3.513
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Rebecca Wong
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Kitamura;L. Zurawel;Rebecca Wong
背景
视频会诊（VC）是一种特殊类型的远程医疗，它使用技术在远处提供实时的视觉和听觉患者评估。在本综述中，我们着手评估vc用于肿瘤患者的评估、监测和管理是否可行。
方法
一项旨在捕获使用远程医疗提供癌症护理的研究的检索策略在medline（1966年至2008年9月）和PubMed（至2008年）数据库中识别了相关文章。如果文章描述的研究包括患者与提供者之间的视频会议以进行评估或监测、医生或护士作为护理提供者、癌症患者、实时咨询和报告1个或多个结局，则纳入文章。
结果
在检索到的300多篇文章中，19篇描述15个独特患者人群（涉及709例患者）的文章被纳入分析。没有找到随机试验。八项研究包括一个对照组，七项涉及一个病例系列。最常报告的结果是患者满意度（10项研究），咨询费用（6项研究），与面对面咨询相比，患者对vc的偏好（5项研究），提供者满意度（4项研究）和提供者便利性（4项研究）。在这些结果中，患者和医生的满意度总体上是积极的，总成本与面对面咨询相当或更低，患者重视将vc作为咨询的一种选择。很少报告评价临床护理效果的结局。
结论
虽然有证据表明维生素C用于肿瘤患者的临床护理是可行和有效的，但研究通常规模较小，方法学薄弱，推理能力有限。
BACKGROUND
Video-consultation (VC) is a specialized type of telemedicine that uses technology to provide real-time visual and audio patient assessment at a distance. In the present review, we set out to evaluate whether vc is feasible for the assessment, monitoring, and management of oncology patients.
METHODS
A search strategy designed to capture studies that addressed the use of telemedicine to deliver cancer care identified relevant articles in the medline (1966 to September 2008) and PubMed (to 2008) databases. Articles were included if they described studies incorporating video-conferencing between patient and provider for assessment or monitoring,physicians or nurses as the care providers,cancer patients,consultation in real-time, and reporting of 1 or more outcomes.
RESULTS
Of the more than three hundred articles retrieved, nineteen articles describing 15 unique patient populations involving 709 patients were inclusded in the analysis. No randomized trials were located. Eight studies included a control group; seven involved a case series. The most commonly reported outcomes were patient satisfaction (ten studies), cost to perform consultation (six studies), patient preference for vc compared with in-person consultation (five studies), provider satisfaction (four studies), and provider convenience (four studies). Of these outcomes, satisfaction on the part of patients and physicians has been positive overall, total costs were comparable to or less than those for in-person consultations, and patients valued having vc as an option for consultation. Outcomes evaluating the effect on clinical care were infrequently reported.
CONCLUSIONS
While there is evidence to suggest that vc is both feasible and effective for use in the clinical care of oncology patients, studies are generally small and methodologically weak, with limited power of inference.