ArticleHealth policy and technology2023
Home Pulse Oximetry Monitoring during the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Assessment of Patient Engagement and Compliance.
Article in Health policy and technology, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Patients with suspected COVID-19 remain at risk for clinical deterioration after discharge and may benefit from home oxygen saturation (SpO Methods: This is a single center, prospective pilot study of patients being discharged from the ED or urgent care after evaluation of symptoms consistent with COVID-19. Subjects were given a portable pulse oximeter and instructed to obtain measurements at rest and with exertion twice daily for 14 days. Patients were contacted daily to collect recorded data. If attempts to contact the patient were unsuccessful for 3 consecutive days, patients were considered lost to follow up. The primary outcome of interest was patient engagement in the program which was defined as the percentage of patients that completed the 14-day study period, meaning they were not lost to follow up. Secondary outcomes included compliance with performing the SpO Results: Fifty patients were enrolled - 2 withdrew and 1 was a screen failure. Overall, engagement in the program was 46.8% with no significant difference between those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 versus those who tested negative (48.2% vs 45%, p = 0.831). Median compliance overall was 42.9% (IQR 22.22-78.57). Median compliance for the positive group was 50.0% (IQR 20-85.71) and 42.86% (IQR 22.92-76.44) for the negative group (p= 0.838). Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that there was acceptable engagement and compliance in a 14-day home SpO
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.