Endometriosis Clinical and Surgical Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparison of Virtual-Only Care to Virtual and In-Person Care Combined

IF 3.3 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of minimally invasive gynecology Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-18 DOI:10.1016/j.jmig.2025.02.009
Emma Goodwin MSc , Hannah Rojas MSc , Heather Noga MA , Caroline E. Lee MD, MSc , Mohamed A. Bedaiwy MD, PhD , Christina Williams MD , Catherine Allaire MD , Paul J. Yong MD, PhD
{"title":"Endometriosis Clinical and Surgical Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparison of Virtual-Only Care to Virtual and In-Person Care Combined","authors":"Emma Goodwin MSc ,&nbsp;Hannah Rojas MSc ,&nbsp;Heather Noga MA ,&nbsp;Caroline E. Lee MD, MSc ,&nbsp;Mohamed A. Bedaiwy MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Christina Williams MD ,&nbsp;Catherine Allaire MD ,&nbsp;Paul J. Yong MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jmig.2025.02.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Endometriosis is a chronic and inflammatory condition that affects approximately 10% of the reproductive-age population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a shift towards virtual care for endometriosis. Our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic and treatment outcomes of virtual-only care, compared to those who had both virtual and in-person visits.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Retrospective descriptive analysis of registry data.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>This study was conducted in British Columbia, Canada, at a tertiary referral center for endometriosis and pelvic pain.</div></div><div><h3>Patients</h3><div>In this cohort (n = 389), we examined patients who received an initial virtual assessment followed by virtual care alone (Virtual Only group, n = 203) and those who had an initial virtual assessment followed by an in-person physical exam (Physical Exam group, n = 186).</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>Virtual care at the center during the COVID-19 pandemic.</div></div><div><h3>Main Results</h3><div>The Physical Exam group was more likely to have surgery compared to the Virtual Only group (45.7% vs. 16%, p &lt;.001). At the time of surgery, the groups did not differ based on type of surgery (e.g., excision of endometriosis and/or hysterectomy), endometriosis anatomic findings (e.g., stage and anatomic subtype), surgical complexity or surgical complications. At baseline, the two groups did not differ in their pain, mental health or quality of life scores. At 1-year follow-up, the two groups did not differ in these outcome measures.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>There was a lower rate of surgery, but no differences in surgical findings or complications, nor in 1-year outcomes, after virtual only care for endometriosis compared to patients that had a virtual visit and then underwent a physical exam. These results support a hybrid model, where a virtual visit is the first contact and serves as a triage tool to determine whether a patient is appropriate for virtual only care or would benefit from a physical exam. Future research could incorporate population-based administrative data or qualitative approaches to understanding patient experiences and physician perspectives on virtual care for the treatment of endometriosis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16397,"journal":{"name":"Journal of minimally invasive gynecology","volume":"32 7","pages":"Pages 592-600.e5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1553465025000639","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Endometriosis is a chronic and inflammatory condition that affects approximately 10% of the reproductive-age population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a shift towards virtual care for endometriosis. Our aim was to evaluate the diagnostic and treatment outcomes of virtual-only care, compared to those who had both virtual and in-person visits.

Design

Retrospective descriptive analysis of registry data.

Setting

This study was conducted in British Columbia, Canada, at a tertiary referral center for endometriosis and pelvic pain.

Patients

In this cohort (n = 389), we examined patients who received an initial virtual assessment followed by virtual care alone (Virtual Only group, n = 203) and those who had an initial virtual assessment followed by an in-person physical exam (Physical Exam group, n = 186).

Interventions

Virtual care at the center during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Main Results

The Physical Exam group was more likely to have surgery compared to the Virtual Only group (45.7% vs. 16%, p <.001). At the time of surgery, the groups did not differ based on type of surgery (e.g., excision of endometriosis and/or hysterectomy), endometriosis anatomic findings (e.g., stage and anatomic subtype), surgical complexity or surgical complications. At baseline, the two groups did not differ in their pain, mental health or quality of life scores. At 1-year follow-up, the two groups did not differ in these outcome measures.

Conclusion

There was a lower rate of surgery, but no differences in surgical findings or complications, nor in 1-year outcomes, after virtual only care for endometriosis compared to patients that had a virtual visit and then underwent a physical exam. These results support a hybrid model, where a virtual visit is the first contact and serves as a triage tool to determine whether a patient is appropriate for virtual only care or would benefit from a physical exam. Future research could incorporate population-based administrative data or qualitative approaches to understanding patient experiences and physician perspectives on virtual care for the treatment of endometriosis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19大流行期间子宫内膜异位症的临床和手术护理:虚拟护理与虚拟和现场护理相结合的比较
目的:子宫内膜异位症是一种慢性炎症性疾病,影响约10%的育龄人口。在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间,对子宫内膜异位症的虚拟护理发生了转变。我们的目的是评估纯虚拟护理的诊断和治疗结果,与那些同时进行虚拟和亲自就诊的患者进行比较。设计:对注册表数据进行回顾性描述性分析。背景:本研究在加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省进行,在子宫内膜异位症和骨盆疼痛的三级转诊中心进行。参与者:在这个队列中(n=389),我们检查了接受初始虚拟评估然后单独进行虚拟护理的患者(n= 203)和接受初始虚拟评估然后进行亲自体检的患者(n= 186)。干预措施:2019冠状病毒病大流行期间在中心提供虚拟护理。结果:与虚拟体检组相比,物理体检组更有可能进行手术(45.7%对16%)。结论:与进行虚拟就诊然后进行物理体检的患者相比,虚拟体检后子宫内膜异位症的手术率较低,但手术结果或并发症没有差异,一年的结果也没有差异。这些结果支持一种混合模式,其中虚拟访问是第一次接触,并作为分类工具,以确定患者是否适合只进行虚拟治疗或从身体检查中受益。未来的研究可以纳入基于人群的管理数据或定性方法,以了解患者体验和医生对虚拟护理治疗子宫内膜异位症的看法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
272
审稿时长
37 days
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.
期刊最新文献
Can Sclerotherapy Help Solve the Endometrioma Dilemma in ART? Only Time Will Tell. Use of Tranexamic Acid in Laparoscopic Myomectomy: AAGL Committee Opinion and Practice Guideline Update. Chronic Disseminated Coccidioidomycosis Presenting as Infertility. Laparoscopic Management for Bilateral Tubal Ectopic Pregnancies Following Intrauterine Insemination. Tubal Fimbria Migration Mimicking an Endometrial Polyp Following Iatrogenic Uterine Perforation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1