Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35441433›Full record

ArticleRespirology (Carlton, Vic.)2022

Home monitoring of lung function, symptoms and quality of life after admission with COVID-19 infection: The HOMECOMIN' study.

Gizal Nakshbandi, Catharina C Moor, Esther J Nossent, J J Miranda Geelhoed, Sara J Baart, Bart G Boerrigter, Joachim G J V Aerts, Suzan F M Nijman, Helger Y Santema, Merel E Hellemons and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Respirology (Carlton, Vic.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Home Spirometry in Children with Cystic Fibrosis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

11 authors.

Gizal NakshbandiDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Catharina C MoorDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Esther J NossentDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J J Miranda GeelhoedDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Sara J BaartDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Bart G BoerrigterDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Joachim G J V AertsDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Suzan F M NijmanDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Helger Y SantemaDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Merel E HellemonsDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marlies S WijsenbeekDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4527-6962

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveTo develop targeted and efficient follow-up programmes for patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), structured and detailed insights in recovery trajectory are required. We aimed to gain detailed insights in long-term recovery after COVID-19 infection, using an online home monitoring programme including home spirometry. Moreover, we evaluated patient experiences with the home monitoring programme.

methodsIn this prospective multicentre study, we included adults hospitalized due to COVID-19 with radiological abnormalities. For 6 months after discharge, patients collected weekly home spirometry and pulse oximetry measurements, and reported visual analogue scales on cough, dyspnoea and fatigue. Patients completed the fatigue assessment scale (FAS), global rating of change (GRC), EuroQol-5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L) and online tool for the assessment of burden of COVID-19 (ABCoV tool). Mixed models were used to analyse the results.

resultsA total of 133 patients were included in this study (70.1% male, mean age 60 years [SD 10.54]). Patients had a mean baseline forced vital capacity of 3.25 L (95% CI: 2.99-3.44 L), which increased linearly in 6 months with 19.1% (Δ0.62 L, p < 0.005). Patients reported substantial fatigue with no improvement over time. Nevertheless, health status improved significantly. After 6 months, patients scored their general well-being almost similar as before COVID-19. Overall, patients considered home spirometry useful and not burdensome.

conclusionSix months after hospital admission for COVID-19, patients' lung function and quality of life were still improving, although fatigue persisted. Home monitoring enables detailed follow-up for patients with COVID-19 at low burden for patients and for the healthcare system.

Indexed as

COVID-19Quality of LifeAdultFatigueFemaleHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedProspective Studieschronic lung diseasecoronavirus diseaseCOVID-19eHealthhealth-related quality of lifehome spirometrypatient-reported outcome measurestelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID35441433
PMCPMC9115460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.