Comparison of Patient Satisfaction and Safety Outcomes for Postoperative Telemedicine vs Face-to-Face Visits in Urology: Results of the Randomized Evaluation and Metrics Observing Telemedicine Efficacy (REMOTE) Trial

Abstract

There is a need to better understand the role of postoperative care via telemedicine (TM). We evaluated patient satisfaction and outcomes of postoperative face-to-face (F2F) versus TM visits for adult ambulatory urological surgeries in an urban academic center. Methods:This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial. At surgery, patients undergoing ambulatory endoscopic procedures or open surgery were randomized 1:1 to a postoperative F2F or TM visit. After the visit, a telephone survey assessing satisfaction was administered. Primary outcome was patient satisfaction; secondary outcomes were time and cost savings, and 30-day safety outcomes. Results:A total of 197 patients were approached; 165 (83%) consented and were randomized-76 (45%) to F2F and 89 (54%) to TM cohorts. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics between the cohorts. Both cohorts were equally satisfied with their postoperative visit (F2F 98.6% vs TM 94.1%, p=0.28) and found their visit to be an acceptable form of health care (F2F 100% vs TM 92.7%, p=0.06). The TM cohort saved a significant amount of time (TM 66.2% spent <15 minutes vs F2F 43.1% spent 1-2 hours, p <0.0001) and money (44.1% TM saved $5-$25 vs 43.1% F2F spent $5-$25, p=0.041) associated with travel. There were no significant differences in 30-day safety outcomes between the cohorts. Conclusions:TM for postoperative visits after ambulatory adult urological surgery saves patients time and money without compromising satisfaction or safety. TM should be offered as an alternative to F2F for routine postoperative care for certain ambulatory urological surgeries.

Keywords: random allocation; telemedicine; urology.