ArticleJMIR cardio2023
Determining Optimal Intervals for In-Person Visits During Video-Based Telemedicine Among Patients With Hypertension: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in JMIR cardio, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntroducing telemedicine in outpatient treatment may improve patient satisfaction and convenience. However, the optimal in-person visit interval for video-based telemedicine among patients with hypertension remains unreported in Japan.
objectiveWe determined the optimal in-person visit interval for video-based telemedicine among patients with hypertension.
methodsThis was a cluster randomized controlled noninferiority trial. The target sites were 8 clinics in Japan that had a telemedicine system, and the target patients were individuals with essential hypertension. Among patients receiving video-based telemedicine, those who underwent in-person visits at 6-month intervals were included in the intervention group, and those who underwent in-person visits at 3-month intervals were included in the control group. The follow-up period of the participants was 6 months. The primary end point of the study was the change in systolic blood pressure, and the secondary end points were the rate of treatment continuation after 6 months, patient satisfaction, health economic evaluation, and safety evaluation.
resultsOverall, 64 patients were enrolled. Their mean age was 54.5 (SD 10.3) years, and 60.9% (39/64) of patients were male. For the primary end point, the odds ratio for the estimated difference in the change in systolic blood pressure between the 2 groups was 1.18 (90% CI -3.68 to 6.04). Notably, the criteria for noninferiority were met. Patient satisfaction was higher in the intervention group than in the control group. Furthermore, the indirect costs indicated that lost productivity was significantly lesser in the intervention group than in the control group. Moreover, the treatment continuation rate did not differ between the intervention and control groups, and there were no adverse events in either group.
conclusionsBlood pressure control status and safety did not differ between the intervention and control groups. In-person visits at 6-month intervals may cause a societal cost reduction and improve patient satisfaction during video-based telemedicine.
trial registrationUMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN-CTR) UMIN000040953; https://tinyurl.com/2p8devm9.
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.