Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36950477›Full record

ArticleTelemedicine reports2023

Diabetes Remote Monitoring Program Implementation: A Mixed Methods Analysis of Delivery Strategies, Barriers and Facilitators.

Elizabeth B Kirkland, Emily Johnson, Chloe Bays, Justin Marsden, Rebecca Verdin, Dee Ford, Kathryn King, Katherine R Sterba

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Telemedicine reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

Elizabeth B KirklandDepartment of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8131-421X
Emily JohnsonCollege of Nursing, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5313-326X
Chloe BaysDepartment of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Justin MarsdenDepartment of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Rebecca VerdinCenter for Telehealth, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4517-4149
Dee FordDepartment of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Kathryn KingDepartment of Pediatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Katherine R SterbaDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) is being increasingly utilized as a type of telemedicine modality to improve access to quality health care, although there are documented challenges with this type of innovation. The goals of this study were to characterize clinic delivery strategies for an RPM program and to examine barriers and facilitators to program implementation in a variety of community clinic settings. Methods: Primary data were collected via individual and small group interviews and surveys of clinical staff from South Carolina primary care clinics participating in an RPM program for patients with diabetes mellitus type 2 in 2019. We used a parallel convergent mixed methods study design with six South Carolina primary care outpatient clinics currently participating in a diabetes remote monitoring program. Clinic staff participants completed surveys to define delivery strategies and experiences with the program in a variety of clinical settings. Interviews of clinic staff examined barriers and facilitators to program implementation guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Quantitative survey data were summarized via descriptive statistics. Qualitative data from interviews were analyzed in a template analysis approach with primary themes identified and organized by two independent coders and guided by the CFIR. Quantitative and qualitative findings were then synthesized in a final step. Results: RPM program delivery strategies varied across clinic, patient population, and program domains, largely affected by staffing, leadership buy-in, resources, patient needs, and inter-site communication. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were linked to similar factors that influenced delivery strategy. Discussion: RPM programs were implemented in a variety of different clinic settings with program delivery tailored to fit within each clinic's workflow and meet patients' needs. By addressing the barriers identified in this study with focused training and support strategies, delivery processes can improve implementation of RPM programs and thus benefit patient outcomes in rural and community settings.

Indexed as

implementation scienceprimary careprogram evaluationqualitative researchtelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID36950477
PMCPMC10027345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read79
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.