ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Real-World Impact of Remote Patient Management on Care Consumption and Care Time in Heart Failure: Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Remote patient management (RPM) is a strategy to track daily health data in patients with heart failure (HF) to enable early detection and treatment of decompensation to prevent hospital readmissions. The implementation of RPM alters standard care and redistributes provider responsibilities. Although randomized controlled trials demonstrate positive clinical outcomes, the impact of implementing RPM on patients' health care usage, as well as the care time and workload of health care providers in a real-world setting, remains unclear. Objective: The objective of this retrospective study is to explore the effects of implementing RPM for HF on patients' cardiac care consumption and caregiver workload within a regional care network through the use of real-world data. Methods: Two hospitals in the same regional care network with aligned care pathways for usual care (UC) were compared: one with RPM (hospital 1) and one without (hospital 2). Between June 2021 and July 2022, patients with HF were included from a clinical registry with a 1-year follow-up. Cardiac health care consumption was quantified by the number and duration of consultations (in-person, phone, and RPM) with nurse practitioners specialized in HF care and cardiologists. HF-related readmissions were also collected. Three groups were analyzed: hospital 1 RPM, hospital 1 UC, and hospital 2 UC. Results: A total of 131 patients were included (hospital 1 RPM: 34, hospital 1 UC: 64, hospital 2 UC: 33). Consultation frequency and duration were significantly higher in the hospital 1 RPM cohort compared to the hospital 1 UC and the hospital 2 UC cohorts (frequency: mean 18.5, SD 9.3 vs mean 9.3, SD 6.0 and mean 11.6, SD 6.3; Conclusions: In this real-world study, the implementation of RPM for patients with HF was associated with a higher nursing workload, with no observed differences in cardiologists' consultations or patient outcomes. These findings highlight the need for optimization at organizational and technological levels and underline the importance of real-world evaluation of the implementation of innovations.
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.