Adam J. Gadzinski, MD, MS, on the Design of a Study Assessing Impact of Telemedicine on Patient-Reported Outcomes

Video

The study sought to determine the impact of a rurally focused telemedicine program on patient outcomes.

In a study presented at the Society of Urologic Oncology 21st Annual Meeting, researchers sought to determine the impact of a rurally focused telemedicine program on patient outcomes in the urologic oncology outpatient clinic at the University of Washington Medical Center (UWMC).

Ultimately, it was revealed that telemedicine provides a medium for cancer care delivery that eliminates the significant travel burden associated with in-person clinic appointments.

In an interview with CancerNetwork®, Adam J. Gadzinski, MD, MS, urologic oncology fellow and an acting instructor of Urologic Oncology at the Urology Clinic at UWMC, explained the design for the study.

Transcription:
So, this was simply put a kind of prospective study where patients who had visits either via in person or via telemedicine were given a post-visit survey that asked questions both about patient satisfaction with the survey itself or with the visit itself, but also questions about travel expenses. Did they have to spend a night in a hotel? How many miles did they travel for? And looked at the differences between patients who had to come to our clinic in person versus those who had a telemedicine visit.

Newsletter

Stay up to date on recent advances in the multidisciplinary approach to cancer.

Recent Videos
“If you have a [patient in the] fourth or fifth line, [JNJ-5322] could be a valid drug of choice,” said Rakesh Popat, BSc, MBBS, MRCP, FRCPath, PhD.
Earlier treatment with daratumumab may be better tolerated for patients with pretreated MRD-negative multiple myeloma.
The trispecific antibody JNJ-5322 demonstrated superior efficacy vs approved agents in multiple myeloma in results shared at the 2025 EHA Congress.
Despite CD19 CAR T-cell therapy exhibiting efficacy in patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma, less than half achieve long-term remission.
Current findings from the phase 1/2 CaDAnCe-101 trial show no predictive factors of improved responses with BGB-16673 in patients with CLL or SLL.
The phase 3 NIVOSTOP trial evaluated an anti–PD-1 immunotherapy, nivolumab, in a patient population similar in the KEYNOTE-689 trial.
Related Content