Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26381104›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2015

Home Telehealth Video Conferencing: Perceptions and Performance.

Alan Taylor, Greg Morris, Joanne Pech, Stuart Rechter, Colin Carati, Michael R Kidd

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Alan TaylorFaculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia. alan.taylor@flinders.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6866-0433
Greg MorrisORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5718-5785
Joanne PechORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8717-4251
Stuart RechterORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5289-3566
Colin CaratiORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6564-1579
Michael R KiddORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0221-1245

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Flinders Telehealth in the Home trial (FTH trial), conducted in South Australia, was an action research initiative to test and evaluate the inclusion of telehealth services and broadband access technologies for palliative care patients living in the community and home-based rehabilitation services for the elderly at home. Telehealth services at home were supported by video conferencing between a therapist, nurse or doctor, and a patient using the iPad tablet.

objectiveThe aims of this study are to identify which technical factors influence the quality of video conferencing in the home setting and to assess the impact of these factors on the clinical perceptions and acceptance of video conferencing for health care delivery into the home. Finally, we aim to identify any relationships between technical factors and clinical acceptance of this technology.

methodsAn action research process developed several quantitative and qualitative procedures during the FTH trial to investigate technology performance and users perceptions of the technology including measurements of signal power, data transmission throughput, objective assessment of user perceptions of videoconference quality, and questionnaires administered to clinical users.

resultsThe effectiveness of telehealth was judged by clinicians as equivalent to or better than a home visit on 192 (71.6%, 192/268) occasions, and clinicians rated the experience of conducting a telehealth session compared with a home visit as equivalent or better in 90.3% (489/540) of the sessions. It was found that the quality of video conferencing when using a third generation mobile data service (3G) in comparison to broadband fiber-based services was concerning as 23.5% (220/936) of the calls failed during the telehealth sessions. The experimental field tests indicated that video conferencing audio and video quality was worse when using mobile data services compared with fiber to the home services. As well, statistically significant associations were found between audio/video quality and patient comfort with the technology as well as the clinician ratings for effectiveness of telehealth.

conclusionsThese results showed that the quality of video conferencing when using 3G-based mobile data services instead of broadband fiber-based services was less due to failed calls, audio/ video jitter, and video pixilation during the telehealth sessions. Nevertheless, clinicians felt able to deliver effective services to patients at home using 3G-based mobile data services.

Indexed as

broadbandeffectiveness, home caremobile data networksreliabilitytelehealthvideo conferencing

Identifiers

PMID26381104
PMCPMC4704976

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.