Author
Listed:
- Ahmed Kotb
- Chris Cameron
- Shuching Hsieh
- George Wells
Abstract
Background: Previous studies on telemedicine have either focused on its role in the management of chronic diseases in general or examined its effectiveness in comparison to standard post-discharge care. Little has been done to determine the comparative impact of different telemedicine options for a specific population such as individuals with heart failure (HF). Methods and Findings: Systematic reviews (SR) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined telephone support, telemonitoring, video monitoring or electrocardiographic monitoring for HF patients were identified using a comprehensive search of the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library. Studies were included if they reported the primary outcome of mortality or any of the following secondary outcomes: all-cause hospitalization and heart failure hospitalization. Thirty RCTs (N = 10,193 patients) were included. Compared to usual care, structured telephone support was found to reduce the odds of mortality(Odds Ratio 0.80; 95% Credible Intervals [0.66 to 0.96]) and hospitalizations due to heart failure (0.69; [0.56 to 0.85]). Telemonitoring was also found to reduce the odds of mortality(0.53; [0.36 to 0.80]) and reduce hospitalizations related to heart failure (0.64; [0.39 to 0.95]) compared to usual post-discharge care. Interventions that involved ECG monitoring also reduced the odds of hospitalization due to heart failure (0.71; [0.52 to 0.98]). Limitations: Much of the evidence currently available has focused on the comparing either telephone support or telemonitoring with usual care. This has therefore limited our current understanding of how some of the less common forms of telemedicine compare to one another. Conclusions: Compared to usual care, structured telephone support and telemonitoring significantly reduced the odds of deaths and hospitalization due to heart failure. Despite being the most widely studied forms of telemedicine, little has been done to directly compare these two interventions against one another. Further research into their comparative cost-effectiveness is also warranted.
Suggested Citation
Ahmed Kotb & Chris Cameron & Shuching Hsieh & George Wells, 2015.
"Comparative Effectiveness of Different Forms of Telemedicine for Individuals with Heart Failure (HF): A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, February.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0118681
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118681
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Nkiruka D Eze & Céu Mateus & Tiago Cravo Oliveira Hashiguchi, 2020.
"Telemedicine in the OECD: An umbrella review of clinical and cost-effectiveness, patient experience and implementation,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-24, August.
- Remedios López-Liria & Antonio López-Villegas & Terje Enebakk & Hilde Thunhaug & Knut Tore Lappegård & Daniel Catalán-Matamoros, 2019.
"Telemonitoring and Quality of Life in Patients after 12 Months Following a Pacemaker Implant: the Nordland Study, a Randomised Trial,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-13, June.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0118681. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.