OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of telemedicine in managing chronic heart disease patients concerning improvement in varied health attributes. DESIGN: This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standard. SETTING: We adopted a logical search process used in two main research databases, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PubMed (MEDLINE). Four reviewers meticulously screened 151 abstracts to determine relevancy and significance to our research objectives. The final sample in the literature review consisted of 20 articles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We looked for improved medical outcomes as the main outcome measure. RESULTS: Our results indicated that telemedicine is highly associated with the reduction in hospitalisations and readmissions (9 of 20 articles, 45%). The other significant attributes most commonly encountered were improved mortality and cost-effectiveness (both 40%) and improved health outcomes (35%). Patient satisfaction occurred the least in the literature, mentioned in only 2 of 20 articles (10%). There was no significant mention of an increase in patient satisfaction because of telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that telemedicine is considered to be effective in quality measures such as readmissions, moderately effective in health outcomes, only marginally effective in customer satisfaction. Telemedicine shows promise on an alternative modality of care for cardiovascular disease, but additional exploration should continue to quantify the quality measures.
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of telemedicine in managing chronic heart diseasepatients concerning improvement in varied health attributes. DESIGN: This review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standard. SETTING: We adopted a logical search process used in two main research databases, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PubMed (MEDLINE). Four reviewers meticulously screened 151 abstracts to determine relevancy and significance to our research objectives. The final sample in the literature review consisted of 20 articles. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We looked for improved medical outcomes as the main outcome measure. RESULTS: Our results indicated that telemedicine is highly associated with the reduction in hospitalisations and readmissions (9 of 20 articles, 45%). The other significant attributes most commonly encountered were improved mortality and cost-effectiveness (both 40%) and improved health outcomes (35%). Patient satisfaction occurred the least in the literature, mentioned in only 2 of 20 articles (10%). There was no significant mention of an increase in patient satisfaction because of telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that telemedicine is considered to be effective in quality measures such as readmissions, moderately effective in health outcomes, only marginally effective in customer satisfaction. Telemedicine shows promise on an alternative modality of care for cardiovascular disease, but additional exploration should continue to quantify the quality measures.
Authors: Friedrich Koehler; Sebastian Winkler; Michael Schieber; Udo Sechtem; Karl Stangl; Michael Böhm; Herbert Boll; Simone S Kim; Kerstin Koehler; Stephanie Lücke; Marcus Honold; Peter Heinze; Thomas Schweizer; Martin Braecklein; Bridget-Anne Kirwan; Goetz Gelbrich; Stefan D Anker Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Sally C Inglis; Robyn A Clark; Finlay A McAlister; Simon Stewart; John G F Cleland Journal: Eur J Heart Fail Date: 2011-07-06 Impact factor: 15.534
Authors: Friedrich Koehler; Sebastian Winkler; Michael Schieber; Udo Sechtem; Karl Stangl; Michael Böhm; Herbert Boll; Gert Baumann; Marcus Honold; Kerstin Koehler; Goetz Gelbrich; Bridget-Anne Kirwan; Stefan D Anker Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-03-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Emily Seto; Kevin J Leonard; Joseph A Cafazzo; Jan Barnsley; Caterina Masino; Heather J Ross Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2012-02-10 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Jeanne T Black; Patrick S Romano; Banafsheh Sadeghi; Andrew D Auerbach; Theodore G Ganiats; Sheldon Greenfield; Sherrie H Kaplan; Michael K Ong Journal: Trials Date: 2014-04-13 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Timothy W Kenealy; Matthew J G Parsons; A Paul B Rouse; Robert N Doughty; Nicolette F Sheridan; Jennifer K Harré Hindmarsh; Sarah C Masson; Harry H Rea Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Brian Kerr; Rebabonye B Pharithi; Matthew Barrett; Carmel Halley; Joe Gallagher; Mark Ledwidge; Kenneth McDonald Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2020-10-21
Authors: Marjolein E Haveman; Mathilde C van Rossum; Roswita M E Vaseur; Claire van der Riet; Richte C L Schuurmann; Hermie J Hermens; Jean-Paul P M de Vries; Monique Tabak Journal: JMIR Form Res Date: 2022-01-07
Authors: Sven Kernebeck; Theresa S Busse; Maximilian D Böttcher; Jürgen Weitz; Jan Ehlers; Ulrich Bork Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 5.742