Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38456334›Full record

ArticleACR open rheumatology2024

Home-Based Telemedicine in Rheumatology-A Scoping Review.

Swamy Venuturupalli, Alexander Peck, Yogamanas Jinka, Natalie Fortune, Nikhil Davuluri, William B Nowell, Kelly Gavigan, John Cush, Neelkamal Soares, Rebecca Grainger and 1 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

11 authors.

Swamy VenuturupalliCedars Sinai Medical Center, University of California Los Angeles, and Attune Health, Los Angeles, California.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0079-5109
Alexander PeckCedars Sinai Medical Center and Pacific Arthritis Care Center, Los Angeles, California.
Yogamanas JinkaAttune Health, Los Angeles, California.
Natalie FortuneAttune Health, Los Angeles, California.
Nikhil DavuluriAttune Health, Los Angeles, California.
William B NowellGlobal Healthy Living Foundation, Upper Nyack, New York.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4951-6476
Kelly GaviganGlobal Healthy Living Foundation, Upper Nyack, New York.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2615-4940
John CushTexas Christian University Burnett School of Medicine, Fort Worth.
Neelkamal SoaresWestern Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, Kalamazoo.
Rebecca GraingerTe Whatu Ora Health New Zealand Capital Coast and Hutt Valley and University of Otago Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9201-8678
Jeffrey R CurtisUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8907-8976

Funding

Rheumatology Research Foundation FY2021 Rheumatology Research Foundation Norman B.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe performed a scoping review of the relevant literature on home-based telehealth in rheumatology to understand its appropriate application in rheumatology practice.

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, and scientific meeting abstracts to identify articles that specifically addressed telehealth suitability, barriers to telehealth, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collected in telehealth settings, and telehealth satisfaction. From the initial search of 4,882 studies, 23 reports were included. In addition, 10 abstracts were also eligible for analysis, resulting in a total of 33 articles: 2 randomized clinical trials, 9 prospective cohort studies, and 22 retrospective studies.

resultsWe found that triage appointments or predictive models could be helpful in selecting patients for telehealth and that telehealth interventions were appropriate for follow-up of patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and inflammatory arthritis, but that conducting new patient visits over telehealth was not ideal. Barriers to telehealth include patient factors (age, technology access) and need for physician/process factors (eg, physical examinations). PROs collected in regular practice can be incorporated into telehealth. Several small, single-center studies suggest that telehealth does not lead to negative outcomes compared with in-person visits, and overall, patients report high patient satisfaction with telehealth. In several scenarios, home-based telehealth was equivalent to in-person visits with regard to patient outcomes and satisfaction.

conclusionThe widespread potential of telehealth to manage and deliver care for people with rheumatic disease is significant. As such, further research in the form of randomized controlled trials can help contribute to growing evidence that shapes telehealth implementation for patients with rheumatic diseases.

Identifiers

PMID38456334
PMCPMC11089445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.