Lindsay Bonsignore1, Nicholas Bloom2, Karen Steinhauser2, Reginald Nichols3, Todd Allen3, Martha Twaddle4, Janet Bull3. 1. Four Seasons Compassion for Life, Flat Rock, North Carolina, USA. Electronic address: lbonsignore@fourseasonscfl.org. 2. Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 3. Four Seasons Compassion for Life, Flat Rock, North Carolina, USA. 4. Aspire Health, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: The impact of telehealth and remote patient monitoring has not been well established in palliative care populations in rural communities. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to 1) describe a telehealth palliative care program using the TapCloud remote patient monitoring application and videoconferencing; 2) evaluate the feasibility, usability, and acceptability of a telehealth system in palliative care; and 3) use a quality data assessment collection tool in addition to TapCloud ratings of symptom burden and hospice transitions. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used to assess feasibility, usability, and acceptability. Quantitative assessments included patient symptom burden and improvement, hospice transitions, and advanced directives. Qualitative semistructured interviews on a subpopulation of telehealth patients, caregivers, and providers were performed to learn about their experiences using TapCloud. RESULTS: One-hundred one palliative care patients in rural Western North Carolina were enrolled in the program. The mean age of patients enrolled was 72 years, with a majority (60%) being female and a pulmonary diagnosis accounting for the largest percentage of patients (23%). Remote patient monitoring using TapCloud resulted in improved symptom management, and patients in the model had a hospice transition rate of 35%. Patients, caregivers, and providers reported overwhelmingly positive experiences with telehealth with three main advantages: 1) access to clinicians, 2) quick responses, and 3) improved efficiency and quality of care. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first articles to describe a telehealth palliative care program and to demonstrate acceptability, feasibility, and usability as well as describe symptom outcomes and hospice transitions.
CONTEXT: The impact of telehealth and remote patient monitoring has not been well established in palliative care populations in rural communities. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to 1) describe a telehealth palliative care program using the TapCloud remote patient monitoring application and videoconferencing; 2) evaluate the feasibility, usability, and acceptability of a telehealth system in palliative care; and 3) use a quality data assessment collection tool in addition to TapCloud ratings of symptom burden and hospice transitions. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used to assess feasibility, usability, and acceptability. Quantitative assessments included patient symptom burden and improvement, hospice transitions, and advanced directives. Qualitative semistructured interviews on a subpopulation of telehealth patients, caregivers, and providers were performed to learn about their experiences using TapCloud. RESULTS: One-hundred one palliative care patients in rural Western North Carolina were enrolled in the program. The mean age of patients enrolled was 72 years, with a majority (60%) being female and a pulmonary diagnosis accounting for the largest percentage of patients (23%). Remote patient monitoring using TapCloud resulted in improved symptom management, and patients in the model had a hospice transition rate of 35%. Patients, caregivers, and providers reported overwhelmingly positive experiences with telehealth with three main advantages: 1) access to clinicians, 2) quick responses, and 3) improved efficiency and quality of care. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first articles to describe a telehealth palliative care program and to demonstrate acceptability, feasibility, and usability as well as describe symptom outcomes and hospice transitions.
Authors: Anand S Iyer; James Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Dina M Khateeb; Lanier O'Hare; Rodney O Tucker; Cynthia J Brown; Mark T Dransfield; Marie A Bakitas Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2019-10-29 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Simen A Steindal; Andréa Aparecida Goncalves Nes; Tove E Godskesen; Alfhild Dihle; Susanne Lind; Anette Winger; Anna Klarare Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-05-05 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Steven Masiano; Edwin Machine; Mtisunge Mphande; Christine Markham; Tapiwa Tembo; Mike Chitani; Angella Mkandawire; Alick Mazenga; Saeed Ahmed; Maria Kim Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-10 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Kristen Allen Watts; Emily Malone; J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Susan McCammon; Erin Currie; Jennifer Hicks; Rodney O Tucker; Eric Wallace; Ronit Elk; Marie Bakitas Journal: Res Nurs Health Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Brook Calton; William Patrick Shibley; Eve Cohen; Steven Z Pantilat; Michael W Rabow; David L O'Riordan; Kara E Bischoff Journal: Palliat Med Rep Date: 2020-12-28