AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of a telehealth care solution compared with usual practice of patients with heart failure (HF). METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with a telehealth care solution (Telekit) as the intervention (with a focus on self-empowerment achieved by engaging patients in their own illness through self-monitoring) combined with usual care and usual care as the control. The primary outcome was a change in HRQoL as measured by the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire Physical Component Summary (PCS) score. Secondary outcomes were changes in HRQoL as measured by the SF-36 questionnaire Mental Component Summary (MSC) score and the HF disease-specific questionnaire Kansas City CardiomyopathyQuestionnaire 12 (KCCQ12) score, all of which were assessed from baseline to approximately 12 months' follow-up between the two groups. Outcomes were assessed via unadjusted and adjusted analyses. RESULTS: At baseline, 299 (145 interventions, 154 controls) patients were enrolled. In the primary analysis (n = 299), the adjusted intervention effects were PCS -0.81 (95% CI -2.7-1.1), MCS 4.66 (95% CI 1.8-7.5) and KCCQ12 3.67 (95% CI -0.7-8.1). Only the change in MCS was statistically significant. An unadjusted analysis replicated the primary analysis. Complete case analyses (n = 193) generally resulted in a lower intervention effect on the PCS score, but the difference remained statistically insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Only the MCS score was significantly higher in the telehealth care group compared to the control group.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02860013), July 28, 2016.
RCT Entities:
AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of a telehealth care solution compared with usual practice of patients with heart failure (HF). METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with a telehealth care solution (Telekit) as the intervention (with a focus on self-empowerment achieved by engaging patients in their own illness through self-monitoring) combined with usual care and usual care as the control. The primary outcome was a change in HRQoL as measured by the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire Physical Component Summary (PCS) score. Secondary outcomes were changes in HRQoL as measured by the SF-36 questionnaire Mental Component Summary (MSC) score and the HF disease-specific questionnaire Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire 12 (KCCQ12) score, all of which were assessed from baseline to approximately 12 months' follow-up between the two groups. Outcomes were assessed via unadjusted and adjusted analyses. RESULTS: At baseline, 299 (145 interventions, 154 controls) patients were enrolled. In the primary analysis (n = 299), the adjusted intervention effects were PCS -0.81 (95% CI -2.7-1.1), MCS 4.66 (95% CI 1.8-7.5) and KCCQ12 3.67 (95% CI -0.7-8.1). Only the change in MCS was statistically significant. An unadjusted analysis replicated the primary analysis. Complete case analyses (n = 193) generally resulted in a lower intervention effect on the PCS score, but the difference remained statistically insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Only the MCS score was significantly higher in the telehealth care group compared to the control group.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02860013), July 28, 2016.
Authors: Anne Sig Vestergaard; Louise Hansen; Sabrina Storgaard Sørensen; Morten Berg Jensen; Lars Holger Ehlers Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-01-27 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Caroline Lang; Martin Roessler; Jochen Schmitt; Antje Bergmann; Vjera Holthoff-Detto Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 4.147