ReviewApplied clinical informatics2022
Home Monitoring Programs for Patients Testing Positive for SARS-CoV-2: An Integrative Literature Review.
Review in Applied clinical informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Resilience in Family Caregivers Using an mHealth App.Applied clinical informatics · 2022Trial
- Monitoring People With COVID-19 at Home With the COVIDFree@Home Program: Feasibility Cohort Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Implementing a Patient Portal for the Remote Follow-Up of Self-Isolating Patients With COVID-19 Infection Through Patient and Stakeholder Engagement (the Opal-COVID Study): Mixed Methods Pilot Study.Journal of participatory medicine · 2024Article
- Advances and Challenges Associated with Low-Cost Pulse Oximeters in Home Care Programs: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Prospective Cohort Study of Remote Patient Monitoring with and without Care Coordination for Hypertension in Primary Care.Applied clinical informatics · 2023Observational
- Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 home monitoring in Saudi Arabia during the second and third waves.IJID regions · 2023Article
- Virtual wards: a rapid evidence synthesis and implications for the care of older people.Age and ageing · 2023Article
- Usability assessment of a mobile app for patients with peripherally inserted central catheters.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic threatened to oversaturate hospitals worldwide, necessitating rapid patient discharge to preserve capacity for the most severe cases. This need, as well as the high risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, led many hospitals to implement remote patient monitoring (RPM) programs for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients in an effort to provide care that was safe and preserve scarce resources.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to provide an integrative review of peer-reviewed literature on different RPM programs that were implemented for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients including their strengths and challenges.
methodsA search was conducted for peer reviewed literature using PubMed, CINAHL, OVID, and Google Scholar. Peer-reviewed studies written in English or Spanish and published between 2019 and 2021 on RPM of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients were considered. Information was extracted according to a qualitative content analysis method, informed by the Comparison of Mobile Patient Monitoring Systems Framework.
resultsOf 57 retrieved articles, 10 publications were included. The sample sizes ranged from 75 to 48,290 and the monitoring length ranged from 7 to 30 days. Information regarding the comparison framework was summarized. Main strengths of using RPM for SARS-CoV-2 positive patients was participant acceptance, feasibility, safety, and resource conservation. Main limitations were the lack of information on patient data security measures, robust outcomes testing, and identification of the most effective biomarkers to track SARS-CoV-2 decompensation.
conclusionDifferent RPM programs for SARS-CoV-2 were implemented, from sending home participants with a pulse oximeter and collecting readings via call to modifying existing mobile applications and sending holistic health questionnaires to participants. This review determined that RPM is beneficial to SARS-CoV-2 positive patients; however, its effectiveness can be improved by further research. Mainly, identifying what patient data are most effective at tracking SARS-CoV-2 decompensation by utilizing advanced technology already in the market.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.