Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35568904›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2022

Effectiveness of remote home monitoring for patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD): systematic review.

Fernanda Inagaki Nagase, Tania Stafinski, Melita Avdagovska, Michael K Stickland, Evelyn Melita Etruw, Devidas Menon

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
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.

Fernanda Inagaki NagaseSchool of Public Health, Health Technology and Policy Unit, University of Alberta, 3-021 Research Transition Facility, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2V2, Canada.
Tania StafinskiSchool of Public Health, Health Technology and Policy Unit, University of Alberta, 3-021 Research Transition Facility, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2V2, Canada.
Melita AvdagovskaSchool of Public Health, Health Technology and Policy Unit, University of Alberta, 3-021 Research Transition Facility, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2V2, Canada.
Michael K SticklandAlberta Health Services, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Evelyn Melita EtruwFaculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Devidas MenonSchool of Public Health, Health Technology and Policy Unit, University of Alberta, 3-021 Research Transition Facility, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2V2, Canada. menon@ualberta.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough remote home monitoring (RHM) has the capacity to prevent exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), evidence regarding its effectiveness remains unclear. The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of RHM in patients with COPD.

methodsA systematic review of the scholarly literature published within the last 10 years was conducted using internationally recognized guidelines. Search strategies were applied to several electronic databases and clinical trial registries through March 2020 to identify studies comparing RHM to 'no remote home monitoring' (no RHM) or comparing RHM with provider's feedback to RHM without feedback. To critically appraise the included randomized studies, the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool (ROB) was used. The quality of included non-randomized interventional and comparative observational studies was evaluated using the ACROBAT-NRSI tool from the Cochrane Collaboration. The quality of evidence relating to key outcomes was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) on the following: health-related quality of life (HRQoL), patient experience and number of exacerbations, number of emergency room (ER) visits, COPD-related hospital admissions, and adherence as the proportion of patients who completed the study. Three independent reviewers assessed methodologic quality and reviewed the studies.

resultsSeventeen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and two comparative observational studies were included in the review. The primary finding of this systematic review is that a considerable amount of evidence relating to the efficacy/effectiveness of RHM exists, but its quality is low. Although RHM is safe, it does not appear to improve HRQoL (regardless of the type of RHM), lung function or self-efficacy, or to reduce depression, anxiety, or healthcare resource utilization. The inclusion of regular feedback from providers may reduce COPD-related hospital admissions. Though adherence RHM remains unclear, both patient and provider satisfaction were high with the intervention.

conclusionsAlthough a considerable amount of evidence to the effectiveness of RHM exists, due to heterogeneity of care settings and the low-quality evidence, they should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveHospitalizationHumansQuality of LifeCOPDHome-basedRemote monitoringSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35568904
PMCPMC9107164

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.