Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39106098›Full record

Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2024

Potential, Pitfalls, and Future Directions for Remote Monitoring of Chronic Respiratory Diseases: Multicenter Mixed Methods Study in Routine Cystic Fibrosis Care.

Martinus C Oppelaar, Yvette Emond, Michiel A G E Bannier, Monique H E Reijers, Hester van der Vaart, Renske van der Meer, Josje Altenburg, Lennart Conemans, Bart L Rottier, Marianne Nuijsink and 4 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Observational
  8. 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

14 authors.

Martinus C OppelaarDepartment of Pediatric Pulmonology, Amalia Children's Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8051-4161
Yvette EmondIQ Health Science Department, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2317-2388
Michiel A G E BannierDepartment of Paediatric Pulmonology, MosaKids Children's Hospital, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4823-5872
Monique H E ReijersDepartment of Pulmonology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4401-5103
Hester van der VaartDepartment of Pulmonary Diseases, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0006-8755-2466
Renske van der MeerDepartment of Pulmonology, Haga Teaching Hospital, The Hague, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1818-6360
Josje AltenburgDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7248-963X
Lennart ConemansDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2348-1826
Bart L RottierDepartment of Pediatric Pulmonology and Pediatric Allergology, University Medical Center Groningen, Beatrix Children's Hospital, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2437-8070
Marianne NuijsinkHaga Teaching Hospital, Juliana Children's Hospital, The Hague, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3948-2794
Lara S van den WijngaartDepartment of Pediatric Pulmonology, Amalia Children's Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4197-371X
Peter J F M MerkusDepartment of Pediatric Pulmonology, Amalia Children's Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1977-7384
Maud Heinen *IQ Health Science Department, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7536-1327
Jolt Roukema *Department of Pediatric Pulmonology, Amalia Children's Hospital, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6971-7892

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current literature inadequately addresses the extent to which remote monitoring should be integrated into care models for chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs).

objectiveThis study examined a remote monitoring program (RMP) in cystic fibrosis (CF) by exploring experiences, future perspectives, and use behavior over 3 years, with the aim of developing future directions for remote monitoring in CRDs.

methodsThis was a mixed methods, multicenter, observational study in 5 Dutch CF centers following a sequential explanatory design. Self-designed questionnaires using the technology acceptance model were sent out to people with CF who had a minimum of 12 months of experience with the RMP and local health care professionals (HCPs). Questionnaire outcomes were used to inform semistructured interviews with HCPs and people with CF. Qualitative findings were reported following the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) checklist. Anonymous data on use frequency of all people with CF were analyzed.

resultsBetween the second quarter of 2020 and the end of 2022, a total of 608 people with CF were enrolled in the program, and a total of 9418 lung function tests and 2631 symptom surveys were conducted. In total, 65% (24/37) of HCPs and 89% (72/81) of people with CF responded to the questionnaire, and 7 HCPs and 12 people with CF participated in semistructured interviews. Both people with CF and HCPs were positive about remote monitoring in CF care and found the RMP a good addition to daily care (people with CF: 44/72, 61%; HCPs: 21/24, 88%). Benefits ranged from supporting individual patients to reducing health care consumption. The most valued monitoring tool was home spirometry by both people with CF (66/72, 92%) and HCPs (22/24, 92%). Downsides included the potential to lose sight of patients and negative psychosocial effects, as 17% (12/72) of people with CF experienced some form of stress due to the RMP. A large majority of people with CF (59/72, 82%) and HCPs (22/24, 92%) wanted to keep using the RMP in future, with 79% (19/24) of HCPs and 75% (54/72) of people with CF looking forward to more replacement of in-person care with digital care during periods of well-being. Future perspectives for the RMP were centered on creating hybrid care models, personalizing remote care, and balancing individual benefits with monitoring burden.

conclusionsRemote monitoring has considerable potential in supporting people with CF and HCPs within the CF care model. We identified 4 practice-based future directions for remote monitoring in CF and CRD care. The strategies, ranging from patient driven to prediction driven, can help clinicians, researchers, and policy makers navigate the rapidly changing digital health field, integrate remote monitoring into local care models, and align remote care with patient and clinician needs.

Indexed as

Cystic FibrosisAdolescentAdultChildChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansMaleMonitoring, PhysiologicNetherlandsSurveys and QuestionnairesTelemedicineYoung Adultchronic respiratory diseasesclinicianscystic fibrosisdigital healthevaluationhealth care professionalsinterviewsmixed methodmixed methodsobservational studypediatricspolicy makerspsychosocialqualitative studyremote monitoringresearcherssemistructured interviewtelehealthtelemonitoringtelespirometry

Identifiers

PMID39106098
PMCPMC11336494

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.