Skip to main content

Table 3 Included study outcomes

From: Smartphone adapters for flexible Nasolaryngoscopy: a systematic review

Study name Year Primary Outcomes of Interest Secondary Outcomes Outcome Measures Findings
Liu H et al 2016 Diagnostic accuracy NA Controlled blinded comparison of scope adapters and endoscope tower recorded videos No significant difference between scope adapter and endoscopy tower videos (mean difference = 1.54%, p = 0.69).
   Video recording quality   5-point Likert scale across 7quality variables No significant difference across 7 categories (p = 0.11–0.92)
Liu YF et al 2016 Resident Education NA Resident and attending self-ratings of educational value of scope adapter examinations (non-validated 5-point scale) Residents felt that reviewing examinations recorded with scope adapters enhanced learning in 79% of cases, and that ability to discuss recorded exams with attendings enhanced learning in 88% of cases. Attendings felt discussing recordings enhanced learning in 81% of cases.
Lozada et al 2017 Diagnostic accuracy NA Event rates of discordant diagnoses between staff/ resident based on smartphone adapter recordings; χ2 to compare frequency of discordant diagnoses across diagnostic categories 11% frequency of discordant exams; No statistically significant difference in number of discordant diagnoses among diagnostic categories
   Video recording quailty   Event rate of repeated examinations 1.3% of exams needed to be repeated due to poor recording quailty