Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34945234›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021

Remote Hospital Care for Recovering COVID-19 Patients Using Telemedicine: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

Harriët M R van Goor, Martine J M Breteler, Kim van Loon, Titus A P de Hond, Johannes B Reitsma, Dorien L M Zwart, Cornelis J Kalkman, Karin A H Kaasjager

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Harriët M R van GoorDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6332-1325
Martine J M BretelerDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Kim van LoonDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5225-8746
Titus A P de HondDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Johannes B ReitsmaJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Dorien L M ZwartJulius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Department of General Practice, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cornelis J KalkmanDepartment of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Karin A H KaasjagerDepartment of Internal Medicine, University Medical Centre Utrecht, 3584 Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6958-8285
University Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo ensure availability of hospital beds and improve COVID-19 patients' well-being during the ongoing pandemic, hospital care could be offered at home. Retrospective studies show promising results of deploying remote hospital care to reduce the number of days spent in the hospital, but the beneficial effect has yet to be established.

methodsWe conducted a single centre, randomised trial from January to June 2021, including hospitalised COVID-19 patients who were in the recovery stage of the disease. Hospital care for the intervention group was transitioned to the patient's home, including oxygen therapy, medication and remote monitoring. The control group received in-hospital care as usual. The primary endpoint was the number of hospital-free days during the 30 days following randomisation. Secondary endpoints included health care consumption during the follow-up period and mortality.

resultsA total of 62 patients were randomised (31 control, 31 intervention). The mean difference in hospital-free days was 1.7 (26.7 control vs. 28.4 intervention, 95% CI of difference -0.5 to 4.2,

conclusionRemote hospital care for recovering COVID-19 patients is feasible. However, we could not demonstrate an increase in hospital-free days in the 30 days following randomisation. Optimising the intervention, timing, and identification of patients who will benefit most from remote hospital care could improve the impact of this intervention.

Indexed as

COVID-19remote hospital careremote monitoringtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID34945234
PMCPMC8706980
OpenAlexW4200131230

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.