Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37726655›Full record

ReviewBMC cardiovascular disorders2023

Use of telemonitoring in patient self-management of chronic disease: a qualitative meta-synthesis.

Anna Creber, Donato Giuseppe Leo, Benjamin J R Buckley, Mahin Chowdhury, Stephanie L Harrison, Masoud Isanejad, Deirdre A Lane, TAILOR investigators

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Anna CreberSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Donato Giuseppe LeoDepartment of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. d.g.leo@liverpool.ac.uk.
Benjamin J R BuckleyLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Liverpool and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Mahin ChowdhurySchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Stephanie L HarrisonDepartment of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Masoud IsanejadLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Liverpool and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
Deirdre A LaneDepartment of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
TAILOR investigators
Liverpool Heart and Chest Hospital · GBUniversity of Liverpool · GBLiverpool John Moores University · GBSouth Australian Health and Medical Research Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelemonitoring for the remote patient self-management of chronic conditions can be a cost-effective method for delivering care in chronic disease; nonetheless, its implementation in clinical practice remains low. The aim of this meta-synthesis is to explore barriers and facilitators associated with the use of remote patient monitoring of chronic disease, drawing on qualitative research, and assessing participant interactions with this technology.

methodA meta-synthesis of qualitative studies was performed. MEDLINE, SCOPUS and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from database date of inception to 5 February 2021. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) was used to critically appraise each study. Thematic synthesis was performed to identify user (patients, carers and healthcare professionals) perspectives and experiences of patient remote monitoring of chronic disease (Type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cardiovascular disease).

resultsSearches returned 10,401 studies and following independent screening by two reviewers, nine studies were included in this meta-synthesis. Data were synthesised and categorised into four key themes: (1) Improved care; (2) Communication; (3) Technology feasibility & acceptability; and (4) Intervention concerns. Most patients using patient remote devices felt motivated in managing their own lifestyles and felt reassured by the close monitoring and increased communication. Barriers identified involved generational differences and difficulties with the technology used.

conclusionMost studies showed a positive attitude to telemonitoring, with patients preferring the convenience of telemonitoring in comparison to attending regular clinics. Further research is required to assess the most effective technology for chronic disease management, how to maintain long-term patient adherence, and identify effective approaches to address generational variation in telemonitoring up-take.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveSelf-ManagementChronic DiseaseHumansChronic diseasee-healthMeta-synthesisTelehealthTelemedicineTelemonitoring

Identifiers

PMID37726655
PMCPMC10510185
OpenAlexW4386858159

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.