ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
The Clinical Impact and Good Practices of Remote Patient Monitoring for Chronic Heart Failure: A French Case Report.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06312501 (Evaluating the Effectiveness of Remote Patient Monitoring), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Remote Patient Monitoring (Satelia® Cardio) for Patients With Heart Failure (TELESAT-HF Study)
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-Reported Experience of Digital Remote Monitoring for Chronic Heart Failure Across Experimental and Routine Reimbursement Periods in France: Repeated Cross-Sectional Surveys of 1378 Users.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Association of a remote monitoring programme with all-cause mortality and hospitalizations in patients with heart failure: National-scale, real-world evidence from a 3-year propensity score analysis of the TELESAT-HF study.European journal of heart failure · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Remote patient monitoring (RPM) can improve the management of chronic diseases. Since 2019, RPM in chronic heart failure (CHF) management has been internationally supported. However, evidence on the clinical impact and good practices of RPM is scarce. We present a case of a patient with CHF that used RPM in France. Patients and Methods: A 74-year-old male was diagnosed with CHF (NYHA I) at the AP-HP Cochin Hospital in January 2020. He faced repetitive hospitalizations for acute heart failure and acute kidney injury. The causes of these acute episodes were unknown. Three therapeutic interventions were implemented (diuretic treatment, RPM and therapeutic education sessions). The patient answered questionnaires regularly and directly through the RPM web application named Satelia Results: Since November 11, 2020, the patient had seven hospitalizations representing a total length of stay of 76 days over a period of 15 months and 2 weeks. Pericarditis was diagnosed as a potential cause and a pre-operative checkup was performed. No tangible benefits were found with diuretic treatment and therapeutic education since they had no effect on stopping the acute episodes leading to hospitalization. RPM did not trigger any clinical alerts until his last hospitalization. During this stay, a clinical telehealth nurse reviewed the patient's clinical setup and found that his initial baseline weight was incorrectly inputted. Since amending this, there were no new episodes. A high-risk, complex and costly heart surgery for pericardial decortication was avoided, and patient satisfaction has increased. Conclusion: To respect good practices, inclusion not only involves adding or registering a patient to a telehealth activity and database but involves redesigning the management and pathway of patients in order to conduct periodic and personalized clinical care via integrated technology into routine care.
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.