ArticleBMJ open2022
Remote COVID-19 patient monitoring system: a qualitative evaluation.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of methods used for COVID-19 telehealth systems evaluation: lessons from past experiences for future use.BMC health services research · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review and knowledge mapping on ICT-based remote and automatic COVID-19 patient monitoring and care.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Patients' and GPs' views and expectations of home monitoring with a pulse oximeter: a mixed-methods process evaluation of a pilot randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023Trial
- Acute home-based management initiatives for COVID-19 patients needing oxygen: observational study reporting mortality and hospital admission outcomes.BMC health services research · 2025Observational
- Implementation of a Virtual Hospital in the Home Service for Patients With COVID-19 in Queensland, Australia: Mixed Methods Evaluation Using the RE-AIM Framework.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Virtual Health Care in Hospital-at-Home Models for Patients With Acute Infections: A Scoping Review.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Review
- Challenges for remote patient monitoring programs in rural and regional areas: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Exploring online public survey lifestyle datasets with statistical analysis, machine learning and semantic ontology.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Patient and Clinician Perceptions of the Pulse Oximeter in a Remote Monitoring Setting for COVID-19: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Remote patient monitoring for COVID-19 patients: comparisons and framework for reporting.BMC health services research · 2023Review
- Patient Satisfaction With a Multisite, Multiregional Remote Patient Monitoring Program for Acute and Chronic Condition Management: Survey-Based Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- A remote care model for patients at high risk of hospital admission due to COVID-19 deterioration: who makes it at home? - a multicenter follow-up case from Slovenia.Croatian medical journal · 2023Observational
- Patient and clinician perspectives of a remote monitoring program for COVID-19 and lessons for future programs.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Home Pulse Oximetry Monitoring during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Assessment of Patient Engagement and Compliance.Health policy and technology · 2023Article
- Characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 home monitoring in Saudi Arabia during the second and third waves.IJID regions · 2023Article
- Ambulatory Remote Patient Monitoring Beyond COVID-19: Engagement and Sustainment Considerations.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMany COVID-19 patients are discharged home from hospital with instructions to self-isolate. This reduces the burden on potentially overwhelmed hospitals. The Royal Melbourne Hospital (RMH) Home Monitoring Programme (HMP) is a model of care for COVID-19 patients which chiefly tracks pulse oximetry and body temperature readings.
objectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the HMP from a patient perspective. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND
participantsOf 46 COVID-19 patients who used the HMP through RMH during April to August 2020, 16 were invited to participate in this qualitative evaluation study; all accepted, including 6 healthcare workers. Attempts were made to recruit a gender-balanced sample across a range of COVID-19 severities and comorbidities. Participants completed a brief semistructured phone interview discussing their experience of using the HMP. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: A thematic analysis of interview data was conducted. Feasibility was defined as the HMP's reported ease of use. Acceptability was considered holistically by reviewing themes in the interview data.
resultsThe HMP allowed clinical deterioration to be recognised as it occurred enabling prompt intervention. All participants reported a positive opinion of the HMP, stating it was highly acceptable and easy to use. Almost all participants said they found using it reassuring. Patients frequently mentioned the importance of the monitoring clinicians as an information conduit. The most suggested improvement was to monitor a broader set of symptoms.
conclusionsThe HMP is highly feasible and acceptable to patients. This model of care could potentially be implemented on a mass-scale to reduce the burden of COVID-19 on hospitals. A key benefit of the HMP is the ability to reassure patients they will receive suitable intervention should they deteriorate while isolating outside of hospital settings.
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.