Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25768023›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2015

Telecare for diabetes, CHF or COPD: effect on quality of life, hospital use and costs. A randomised controlled trial and qualitative evaluation.

Timothy W Kenealy, Matthew J G Parsons, A Paul B Rouse, Robert N Doughty, Nicolette F Sheridan, Jennifer K Harré Hindmarsh, Sarah C Masson, Harry H Rea

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 15 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 15 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 15 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. mHealth education interventions in heart failure.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Timothy W KenealyDepartment of General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Matthew J G ParsonsFaculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand, in partnership with Waikato District Health Board, Waikato, New Zealand.
A Paul B RouseDepartment of Accounting and Finance, The University of Auckland Business School, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Robert N DoughtyDepartment of Medicine, University of Auckland and Greenlane Cardiovascular Service, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand.
Nicolette F SheridanSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Jennifer K Harré HindmarshNgati Porou Hauora Charitable Trust, Te Puia Springs, Tairawhiti/East Coast, New Zealand.
Sarah C MassonSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Harry H ReaDepartment of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
University of Auckland · NZAuckland City Hospital · NZWaikato District Health Board · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the effect of telecare on health related quality of life, self-care, hospital use, costs and the experiences of patients, informal carers and health care professionals.

methodsPatients were randomly assigned either to usual care or to additionally entering their data into a commercially-available electronic device that uploaded data once a day to a nurse-led monitoring station. Patients had congestive heart failure (Site A), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (Site B), or any long-term condition, mostly diabetes (Site C). Site C contributed only intervention patients - they considered a usual care option to be unethical. The study took place in New Zealand between September 2010 and February 2012, and lasted 3 to 6 months for each patient. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (SF36). Data on experiences were collected by individual and group interviews and by questionnaire.

resultsThere were 171 patients (98 intervention, 73 control). Quality of life, self-efficacy and disease-specific measures did not change significantly, while anxiety and depression both decreased significantly with the intervention. Hospital admissions, days in hospital, emergency department visits, outpatient visits and costs did not differ significantly between the groups. Patients at all sites were universally positive. Many felt safer and more cared-for, and said that they and their family had learned more about managing their condition. Staff could all see potential benefits of telecare, and, after some initial technical problems, many staff felt that telecare enabled them to effectively monitor more patients.

conclusionsStrongly positive patient and staff experiences and attitudes complement and contrast with small or non-significant quantitative changes. Telecare led to patients and families taking a more active role in self-management. It is likely that subgroups of patients benefitted in ways that were not measured or visible within the quantitative data, especially feelings of safety and being cared-for.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000269033.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaDiabetes MellitusFemaleHeart FailureHospitalsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandPatient SatisfactionPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveQuality of LifeSelf CareSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID25768023
PMCPMC4358961
OpenAlexW2069242782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.