| Literature DB >> 33693293 |
Yayoi Tetsuou Tsukada1,2, Eitaro Kodani3, Kuniya Asai4, Masahiro Yasutake1, Yoshihiko Seino5, Wataru Shimizu5.
Abstract
Background: Given the high prevalence of heart failure (HF) in the elderly, it is essential to establish medical coordination between general practitioners (GPs) and acute care hospitals (ACHs) in an aging society. The aim of this study was to elucidate the status of acceptance of elderly patients with HF and their management requirements in a comprehensive community health system. Furthermore, we investigated GPs' interest in using information and communications technology (ICT) in patient care. Methods andEntities:
Keywords: Chronic heart failure; Comprehensive community care system; Geriatrics
Year: 2021 PMID: 33693293 PMCID: PMC7939955 DOI: 10.1253/circrep.CR-20-0132
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Circ Rep ISSN: 2434-0790
Figure 1.Locations of the 4 affiliated teaching hospitals of Nippon Medical School.
(A) Population Characteristics of Medical Care Areas, (B) Sex and Age of Respondents, and the Type of Healthcare Provider to Which Respondents Belong, According to Medical Care Areas, (C) Specialities and Subspecialities of Respondents
| (A) | Medical care area | National | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Central District | South Tama | South Kawasaki | Inba | |||
| Population (2015) | 860,669 | 1,430,411 | 631,797 | 710,071 | ||
| Population growth rate 2010–2015 | 13.61 | 0.76 | 4.35 | 0.79 | −0.75 | |
| Population aging rate 2015 (%) | 19.40 | 25.00 | 19.40 | 25.20 | 26.60 | |
| Population density 2015 (/km2) | 13,524.00 | 4,405.20 | 9,828.80 | 1,026.60 | 340.80 | |
| Number respondents | 169 (43) | 28 (7) | 60 (15) | 73 (19) | 62 (16) | 392 (100) |
| Female sex | 22 (14) | 3 (10) | 13 (20) | 2 (3.9) | 0 (0) | 40 (13) |
| Age group (years) | ||||||
| 30 s | 11 (6) | 1 (3) | 2 (3) | 3 (4) | 3 (5) | 20 (5) |
| 40 s | 36 (21) | 6 (23) | 25 (40) | 10 (14) | 17 (27) | 90 (23) |
| 50 s | 75 (45) | 12 (40) | 17 (29) | 23 (34) | 30 (48) | 157 (40) |
| 60 s | 42 (23) | 7 (27) | 11 (20) | 28 (36) | 11 (18) | 99 (25) |
| ≥70 | 5 (4) | 2 (7) | 2 (8) | 9 (12) | 8 (13) | 26 (7) |
| Type of healthcare provider | ||||||
| Clinic | ||||||
| No inpatient facilities | 142 (84) | 24 (83) | 50 (83) | 62 (85) | 43 (69) | 321 (82) |
| Inpatient facilities with ≤19 beds | 5 (3) | 0 (0) | 2 (3) | 4 (5) | 1 (2) | 13 (3) |
| Hospital | ||||||
| Acute care; inpatient facilities | 16 (9) | 2 (7) | 5 (8) | 3 (4) | 12 (19) | 38 (10) |
| Subacute care | 3 (2) | 0 (0) | 1 (2) | 4 (5) | 15 (24) | 11 (3) |
| Rehabilitation | 1 (1) | 1 (4) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 1 (2) | 3 (1) |
| Convalescent care | 2 (1) | 1 (4) | 2 (3) | 0 (0) | 1 (2) | 6 (2) |
| ( | ||||||
| Internal medicine | 170 (43) | Cardiovascular Medicine or Surgery | 88 (22) | |||
| Surgery | 31 (8) | Gastroenterology | 77 (20) | |||
| Emergency medicine | 2 (1) | Nephrology, Urology, Dialysis | 26 (7) | |||
| Rehabilitation | 2 (1) | Neurology, Neurosurgery | 14 (4) | |||
| Family medicine | 2 (1) | Respiratory Medicine or Surgery | 17 (4) | |||
| Orthopedics | 3 (1) | Diabetology | 13 (3) | |||
| Neurosurgery | 8 (2) | Endocrinology | 3 (1) | |||
| Urology | 9 (2) | Hematology | 2 (1) | |||
| Gynecology | 3 (1) | Rheumatology | 5 (1) | |||
| Radiology | 1 (0.3) | Allergy | 5 (1) | |||
| Anesthesiology | 2 (0.5) | |||||
| Pediatrics | 3 (1) | |||||
| Geriatrics | 1 (0.3) | |||||
| None | 29 (7) | |||||
| Not available | 126 (32) | |||||
(A) Adapted with permission from reference Takahashi et al. (B) Data are presented as n (%).
Status of Implementation of Home Care Services
| Regular visits | Emergency visits | Regular and | No home visits | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 59 (15) | 45 (12) | 102 (27) | 186 (45) | |
| Male | 52 (15) | 36 (11) | 94 (28) | 159 (47) |
| Female | 7 (14) | 9 (18) | 8 (16) | 27 (53) |
| (NS) | ||||
| ≥30 | 2 (10) | 0 (0) | 7 (35) | 11 (50) |
| 40 s | 13 (14) | 16 (18) | 13 (14) | 48 (53) |
| 50 s | 29 (18) | 13 (8) | 51 (32) | 64 (41) |
| 60 s | 13 (13) | 13 (13) | 27 (27) | 46 (46) |
| ≥70 | 2 (8) | 3 (11) | 4 (15) | 17 (66) |
| (NS) | ||||
| Central Tokyo | 26 (15) | 24 (14) | 50 (30) | 69 (41) |
| South Tama | 9 (21) | 2 (4) | 12 (32) | 35 (39) |
| South Kawasaki | 9 (15) | 4 (7) | 9 (20) | 11 (58) |
| Inba | 6 (8) | 13 (18) | 18 (25) | 36 (49) |
| Other | 26 (15) | 2 (4) | 13 (17) | 35 (46) |
| (NS) | ||||
Data are given as n (%). GP, general practitioner.
Figure 2.Reasons specified by respondents for not providing home care services.
Acceptance of Patients With Heart Failure for Treatment in the Clinic According to Stage
| Heart failureA | Too difficult to | NA | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stage A | Stage B | Stage C | Stage D | |||
| 51 (13) | 86 (23) | 207 (53) | 11 (3) | 32 (8) | 5 (2) | |
| 97 (35) | 218 (56) | |||||
| Male | 46 (13) | 66 (19) | 189 (55) | 9 (3) | 29 (9) | 4 (1) |
| Female | 5 (12) | 20 (39) | 18 (35) | 2 (4) | 3 (6) | 1 (2) |
| P value | <0.05 | |||||
| ≥30 | 1 (3) | 6 (30) | 12 (60) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| 40 | 6 (7) | 23 (25) | 48 (53) | 5 (6) | 8 (9) | 0 (0) |
| 50 | 14 (9) | 35 (22) | 91 (58) | 3 (2) | 10 (6) | 4 (3) |
| 60 | 21 (21) | 21 (21) | 44 (44) | 2 (2) | 10 (10) | 1 (1) |
| ≥70 | 9 (35) | 1 (4) | 12 (46) | 0 (0) | 4 (15) | 0 (0) |
| P value | <0.05 | |||||
| Central Tokyo | 11 (7) | 43 (25) | 104 (62) | 3 (2) | 7 (4) | 1 (0) |
| South Tama | 3 (11) | 7 (25) | 14 (50) | 0 (0) | 3 (11) | 1 (4) |
| South Kawasaki | 9 (15) | 15 (25) | 26 (43) | 3 (5) | 5 (8) | 2 (3) |
| Inba | 19 (26) | 10 (13) | 34 (47) | 2 (3) | 7 (10) | 1 (1) |
| Other | 9 (15) | 11 (18) | 29 (47) | 3 (5) | 10 (16) | 0 (0) |
| P value | <0.005 | |||||
| Regular visits only | 6 (10) | 14 (23) | 31 (53) | 1 (2) | 7 (12) | 0 (0) |
| Emergency visits only | 12 (27) | 10 (22) | 21 (47) | 0 (0) | 2 (4) | 0 (0) |
| Regular and emergency visits | 5 (5) | 23 (23) | 70 (67) | 2 (2) | 1 (1) | 1 (1) |
| No home visits | 28 (15) | 39 (21) | 85 (46) | 8 (4) | 22 (12) | 4 (2) |
| P value | <0.005 | |||||
Unless indicated otherwise, data are given as n (%). AHeart failure was graded according to the 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for the management of heart failure. Stages A and B were considered asymptomatic, whereas and Stages C and D were considered symptomatic. GP, general practitioner.
Figure 3.Regional medical care collaboration requirements for elderly patients with heart failure. ACH, acute care hospital; ER, emergency room; GPs, general practitioners.
Barriers to Telemedicine Implementation for Patients With Heart Failure
| Barrier | No. |
|---|---|
| Overly complicated system | 54 (14) |
| Widespread use of electronic medical records | 96 (24) |
| No incentives in health insurance | 117 (30) |
| User interface for healthcare workers | 128 (33) |
| Personal information protection | 137 (35) |
| User interface for patients | 168 (43) |
| Costs for equipment installation | 244 (62) |
Multiple answers were allowed.
General Practitioners’ Opinions on Implementing a Remote Patient Monitoring System
| No. | |
|---|---|
| Patients can receive better care at home through daily monitoring | 153 (39) |
| It is difficult for 1 physician to handle multiple patients | 139 (35) |
| Healthcare providers cannot monitor patients all day long | 137 (35) |
| Patients can be treated earlier | 129 (33) |
| It is not realistic, because so many problems need to be overcome | 93 (24) |
| Emergency visits will be reduced | 90 (23) |
| It is useful for efficient medical care | 55 (14) |
| Not sure | 44 (11) |
| Being monitored all day is stressful for patients | 33 (8) |
Multiple answers were allowed.