Labib Imran Faruque1, Natasha Wiebe1, Arash Ehteshami-Afshar1, Yuanchen Liu1, Neda Dianati-Maleki1, Brenda R Hemmelgarn1, Braden J Manns1, Marcello Tonelli2. 1. Department of Medicine, Royal Alexandra Hospital (Faruque), Edmonton, Alta.; Department of Medicine (Wiebe, Liu), University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta.; Department of Medicine (Ehteshami-Afshar, Dianati-Maleki), Mount Sinai West and Mount Sinai St. Luke's Hospitals, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; Department of Medicine (Hemmelgarn, Manns, Tonelli), University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta. 2. Department of Medicine, Royal Alexandra Hospital (Faruque), Edmonton, Alta.; Department of Medicine (Wiebe, Liu), University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta.; Department of Medicine (Ehteshami-Afshar, Dianati-Maleki), Mount Sinai West and Mount Sinai St. Luke's Hospitals, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; Department of Medicine (Hemmelgarn, Manns, Tonelli), University of Calgary, Calgary, Alta. tonelli.admin@ucalgary.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Telemedicine, the use of telecommunications to deliver health services, expertise and information, is a promising but unproven tool for improving the quality of diabetes care. We summarized the effectiveness of different methods of telemedicine for the management of diabetes compared with usual care. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases (to November 2015) and reference lists of existing systematic reviews for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing telemedicine with usual care for adults with diabetes. Two independent reviewers selected the studies and assessed risk of bias in the studies. The primary outcome was glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) reported at 3 time points (≤ 3 mo, 4-12 mo and > 12 mo). Other outcomes were quality of life, mortality and episodes of hypoglycemia. Trials were pooled using randomeffects meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: From 3688 citations, we identified 111 eligible RCTs (n = 23 648). Telemedicine achieved significant but modest reductions in HbA1C in all 3 follow-up periods (difference in mean at ≤ 3 mo: -0.57%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.74% to -0.40% [39 trials]; at 4-12 mo: -0.28%, 95% CI -0.37% to -0.20% [87 trials]; and at > 12 mo: -0.26%, 95% CI -0.46% to -0.06% [5 trials]). Quantified heterogeneity (I2 statistic) was 75%, 69% and 58%, respectively. In meta-regression analyses, the effect of telemedicine on HbA1C appeared greatest in trials with higher HbA1C concentrations at baseline, in trials where providers used Web portals or text messaging to communicate with patients and in trials where telemedicine facilitated medication adjustment. Telemedicine had no convincing effect on quality of life, mortality or hypoglycemia. INTERPRETATION: Compared with usual care, the addition of telemedicine, especially systems that allowed medication adjustments with or without text messaging or a Web portal, improved HbA1C but not other clinically relevant outcomes among patients with diabetes.
BACKGROUND: Telemedicine, the use of telecommunications to deliver health services, expertise and information, is a promising but unproven tool for improving the quality of diabetes care. We summarized the effectiveness of different methods of telemedicine for the management of diabetes compared with usual care. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases (to November 2015) and reference lists of existing systematic reviews for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing telemedicine with usual care for adults with diabetes. Two independent reviewers selected the studies and assessed risk of bias in the studies. The primary outcome was glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) reported at 3 time points (≤ 3 mo, 4-12 mo and > 12 mo). Other outcomes were quality of life, mortality and episodes of hypoglycemia. Trials were pooled using randomeffects meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: From 3688 citations, we identified 111 eligible RCTs (n = 23 648). Telemedicine achieved significant but modest reductions in HbA1C in all 3 follow-up periods (difference in mean at ≤ 3 mo: -0.57%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.74% to -0.40% [39 trials]; at 4-12 mo: -0.28%, 95% CI -0.37% to -0.20% [87 trials]; and at > 12 mo: -0.26%, 95% CI -0.46% to -0.06% [5 trials]). Quantified heterogeneity (I2 statistic) was 75%, 69% and 58%, respectively. In meta-regression analyses, the effect of telemedicine on HbA1C appeared greatest in trials with higher HbA1C concentrations at baseline, in trials where providers used Web portals or text messaging to communicate with patients and in trials where telemedicine facilitated medication adjustment. Telemedicine had no convincing effect on quality of life, mortality or hypoglycemia. INTERPRETATION: Compared with usual care, the addition of telemedicine, especially systems that allowed medication adjustments with or without text messaging or a Web portal, improved HbA1C but not other clinically relevant outcomes among patients with diabetes.
Authors: E Andrew Balas; Santosh Krishna; Rainer A Kretschmer; Thomas R Cheek; David F Lobach; Suzanne Austin Boren Journal: Med Care Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Lesley Wood; Matthias Egger; Lise Lotte Gluud; Kenneth F Schulz; Peter Jüni; Douglas G Altman; Christian Gluud; Richard M Martin; Anthony J G Wood; Jonathan A C Sterne Journal: BMJ Date: 2008-03-03
Authors: Juliana C N Chan; Yi Sui; Brian Oldenburg; Yuying Zhang; Harriet H Y Chung; William Goggins; Shimen Au; Nicola Brown; Risa Ozaki; Rebecca Y M Wong; Gary T C Ko; Ed Fisher Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Maria C E Rossi; Antonio Nicolucci; Paolo Di Bartolo; Daniela Bruttomesso; Angela Girelli; Francisco J Ampudia; David Kerr; Antonio Ceriello; Carmen De La Questa Mayor; Fabio Pellegrini; David Horwitz; Giacomo Vespasiani Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-10-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Allison A Lewinski; Connor Drake; Ryan J Shaw; George L Jackson; Hayden B Bosworth; Megan Oakes; Sarah Gonzales; Nicole E Jelesoff; Matthew J Crowley Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Goldy C George; Adrianna Buford; Kenneth Hess; Sarina A Piha-Paul; Ralph Zinner; Vivek Subbiah; Christina Hinojosa; Charles S Cleeland; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Elmer V Bernstam; David S Hong Journal: JCO Clin Cancer Inform Date: 2018-12
Authors: Alberto J Pérez-Panero; María Ruiz-Muñoz; Raúl Fernández-Torres; Cynthia Formosa; Alfred Gatt; Manuel Gónzalez-Sánchez Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-06-09 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Melanie J Davies; David A D'Alessio; Judith Fradkin; Walter N Kernan; Chantal Mathieu; Geltrude Mingrone; Peter Rossing; Apostolos Tsapas; Deborah J Wexler; John B Buse Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 10.122