Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41067773›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2025

Patient and healthcare professional engagement and time use within a randomised controlled trial: investigating intervention costs associated with remote person-centred care in Sweden.

Emmelie Barenfeld, Inger Ekman, Matilda Cederberg, Andreas Fors, Lilas Ali, Hanna Gyllensten

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03183817 (Person-centred Care at Distance for Persons With Chronic Heart Failure), which is not on this 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.

NCT03183817 naunknown statusnot on this map

Person-centred Care at Distance for Persons With Chronic Heart Failure (CHF) and/or Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)

TypeinterventionalSponsorGöteborg UniversityRan2017 to 2021Enrolled224ConditionsHeart Failure, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseArmsPerson-centred care at distance
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  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

6 authors.

Emmelie BarenfeldDepartment of Health and Rehabilitation, University of Gothenburg Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Box 455, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden emmelie.barenfeld@gu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4945-4623
Inger EkmanInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, University of Gothenburg Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5559-5203
Matilda CederbergInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, University of Gothenburg Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4727-9638
Andreas ForsInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, University of Gothenburg Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8980-0538
Lilas AliInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, University of Gothenburg Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7027-4371
Hanna GyllenstenInstitute of Health and Care Sciences, University of Gothenburg Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6890-5162

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the usage patterns of patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) using a person-centred telehealth and e-health intervention.

designAn exploratory, descriptive, observational study embedded in the "Person-centred care at a distance (PROTECT)" randomised controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03183817) as part of a process evaluation. Data on intervention use and time spent on the intervention were collected. Descriptive statistics were calculated.

settingParticipants were recruited from nine public primary healthcare facilities located in various areas of Gothenburg, Sweden.

participants110 patients participating in the intervention group in the PROTECT trial were included. Participants were diagnosed with chronic heart failure (CHF, n=42), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, n=56) or both (n=12). They were 33-93 years old (mean 71 years). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: A secondary outcome report on resource use.

interventionThe 6-month-long intervention was performed as an add-on to standard care and comprised person-centred telephone support and access to a digital platform. Per-protocol use included co-creation of a health plan via the telephone and use of the digital platform at least once. Forms of use were tailored to the preferences and needs of the patients.

resultsMost intervention activities took place in the first 3 months of the intervention. Most patients used a combination of phone and digital support, spending most of their time using the digital platform. Overall, patients and HCPs spent 6 and 2.5 hours/patient using the intervention, respectively. Of this time, 1.5 hours involved synchronous communication through phone calls, with health-plan calls averaging 77 min.

conclusionsThe intervention usage patterns of patients and HCPs differed. Despite HCPs being accessible when required, patients dedicated most of their time to self-care practices. Based on time distribution data, 15 full-time HCPs could potentially co-create, document and follow-up on health plans for 10 000 patients under study conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03183817.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelHeart FailurePatient-Centered CarePatient ParticipationPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveTelemedicineAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSwedenHealth economicsHealth policyHealth Services for the AgedPerson-Centered CarePreventive Health ServicesPulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive

Identifiers

PMID41067773
PMCPMC12519657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.