| Literature DB >> 35382079 |
Azam Sabahi1, Azamossadat Hosseini2, Hasan Emami2, Sohrab Almasi2.
Abstract
Background: The current systematic review aimed to determine the effect of telemedicine services on adherence in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and to describe the type of adherence and applied devices and modules. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: Adherence; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Telemedicine
Year: 2021 PMID: 35382079 PMCID: PMC8978036
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tanaffos ISSN: 1735-0344
Search strategy in scientific databases
|
| Search was conducted up to March 10, 2019 | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| English |
|
| PubMed: All fields | |
| Scopus: All fields | ||
| Embase: All fields | ||
| ISI: All fields | ||
|
| “Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease” OR “COPD” OR “Pulmonary Disease” OR “Chronic Obstructive” OR “Chronic Obstructive Airway Disease” OR “Airway Obstruction*” OR “ COAD” OR “Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease” OR “COLD” OR “Airflow Obstruction*” OR “Respiratory Tract Diseases” OR “Lung Diseases” OR “Bronchitis” OR “Pulmonary Emphysema” OR “Emphysema” OR “Lung emphysema” | |
|
| “Telemedicine” OR “Telecommunications” OR “Telemetry” OR “Telepathology” OR “Teleradiology” OR “Telerehabilitation” OR “Communications Media” OR “Remote Consultation” OR “Mobile Health” OR “Mhealth” OR “Telehealth” OR “Ehealth” | |
|
| “Adherence” OR “Compliance” OR “Follow-up” OR “Trace” | |
|
| #1 AND #2 AND #3 |
Telemedicine Studies Checklist Scores and Items
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Patient selection | Methods of randomization/selection; equivalence of intervention and control groups; drop-outs before start of intervention | 2 |
| Description/specification of the interventions | Adequate description for both intervention and control groups | 2 | |
| Specification and analysis of study | Sample size; statistical methods used; clear specification of outcome measures | 2 | |
| Patient disposal | Length of follow-up; drop-outs; compliance failures | 2 | |
| Outcomes reported | Fullness and clarity of reporting; missing results; statistical summary; whether conclusions were consistent with data | 2 | |
|
| Large randomized controlled trials | Defined as those with at least 50 subjects in each arm | 5 |
| Smaller randomized controlled trials | 3 | ||
| Prospective non-randomized studies | 2 | ||
| Retrospective comparative studies | 1 |
Category A: scores 11.5–15 (High quality)
Category B: scores 9.5– 11 (Good quality)
Category C: scores 7.5–9 (Fair to good quality)
Category D: scores 5.5–7 (Poor to fair quality)
Category E: scores 1– 5 (Poor quality)
Figure 1.Flow diagram of included and excluded studies
Main Characteristics and Description of the Technology Used in the Studies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Calvo GS/2014(3) | RCT | Spain | 59; IG(n=29), CG(n=30) | 72.7 ± 9.3 / 75.0 ± 9.7 | Home Telemonitoring | 7-months |
|
| Sanchez-Morillo D/2015(9) | UBA | Spain | IG(n=15) | 70.2±6.6 | Home Telemonitoring | 6-months |
|
| Tabak M/2014(2) | RCT | Netherlands | 12; IG(n=10)/CG(n=2) | 62.8±7.4/64.1±9.0 | Home Telemonitoring and Teleconsultation | 9 months |
|
| Tabak M / 2014 (48) | RCT | Netherlands | 30; IG( | 67.9 ± 5.7 / 65.2 ± 9.0 | Home Telerehabilitation | 4 weeks |
|
| Hoaas H/2016(27) | UBA | Norway | IG(n=10) | 55.2 | Home Telerehabilitation | Two-year |
|
| Dekker-van Weering MGH/2016(52) | UBA | Netherlands | IG(n=22) | 61.7 (9.3) | Home Telemonitoring and Telecommunication | 12 weeks |
|
| Hoaas H/2016(53) | UBA | Norway | IG(n=9) | 58.1±6 | Home Telerehabilitation | 2-year |
|
| Benzo RP/2018(51) | UBA | Rochester | IG(n=12) | >=40 | Home Telerehabilitation | 8-week |
|
| Velardo C / 2017(50) | RCT | United Kingdom | 166;IG(n=110)/CG(n=56) | >=40 in IG | Home Telemonitoring | 12-month |
|
| Tsai LLY/2017(49) | RCT | Australia | 36; IG(n=19)/CG(n=17) | 75 (9) / 73 (8) | Home Telerehabilitation | 8-week |
|
| Thomas RM/2017(55) | UBA | United States | IG(n=35) | 67.5 ±6.6 | Home Videoconferencing | 3 months |
|
| Moy ML / 2016(46) | RCT | United States | 237; IG(n=153),CG (n=84) | 66.4 (9.2)/67 (8.6) | Home Telemonitoring | 12 months |
|
| Bourne S/2017(42) | RCT | United Kingdom | 90;IG (n=64), CG (n=26) | 71.4 (8.6)/69.1 (7.9) | Home Telerehabilitation | 6 weeks |
|
| Antoniades NC/2012(40) | RCT | Australia | 36; IG(n=16), CG(n=20) | 68 (9) / 70 (10) | Home Tele monitoring | 12 months |
|
| Farmer A/2017(45) | Multicenter RCT | United Kingdom | 141;IG(n=93), CG(n=48) | 69.8 (10.6)/69.8 (9.1) | Telemonitoring | 12 months |
|
| Ringbaek TJ / 2016(47) | NRCT | Denmark | 99; IG(n=42), CG(n=57) | 68.8 (11.0) / 68.4 (9.1) | Home Telerehabilitation | 7–10weeks |
|
| Vitacca M/2013(56) | UBA | Italy | IG(n=39) | 72 ± 8.6 | Home Tele-assistance | 6 months |
|
| Blumenthal JA/2014(41) | RCT | Columbus | 301; IG (N=150)/CG N=151) | 66.6 (8.7)/65.6 (7.9) | Telephone-based coping skills training (CST) | 16 weeks |
|
| Smith HS / 2016(54) | UBA | NA | IG(n=30) | 72.2 (5.7)/67.8 (7.0) | Home Telecommunication and Telemonitoring | 320 days |
|
| Broadbent E / 2018(43) | RCT | New Zealand | 51; IG(n=25), CG(n=26) | 69.10 (9.85)/70.57 (10.34) | Home Telerobotic | 4 months |
|
| Cox M / 2018(44) | RCT | United Kingdom | 58;IG (n=43)/CG(n=15) | 67.8 (11.12) | Home Telerehabilitation | 7 months |
UBA – uncontrolled before and after study; NRCT– non-randomized controlled trial; RCT – randomized controlled trial; NA – no information available; IG – intervention group; CG – control group; SD – standard deviation
Impact of Telemedicine Services on Adherence
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Adherence was calculated as the percentage of the total days the patient utilized the devices to monitor the parameters (3). | + |
| 2 | Compliance rate was defined as the ratio of completed tasks (the number of days in which a valid questionnaire and respiratory recording were received) (9). | + |
| 3 | Adherence to the exercise scheme was calculated by dividing the number of schemes prescribed by the number of schemes performed (2). | − |
| 4 | Compliance was calculated by dividing the number of days the activity sensor was worn by the minimum number of days that it was prescribed (i.e. ≥ four days/week) (48). | + |
| 5 | Adherence was measured in terms of the frequency of registrations on the webpage (27). | − |
| 6 | Adherence to the exercises was defined as the percentage of exercises performed versus the exercises prescribed (52). | + |
| 7 | Adherence rate was calculated based on the recommendation of regular daily diary registrations and three training sessions per week (53). | − |
| 8 | Adherence rates were defined as the percentage of the days the task (daily completion data on 12-minute walking, full-body exercises, and the check-in wellness questionnaire) was completed (51). | + |
| 9 | Compliance was calculated as the number of days a week that a patient used the system (maximum compliance could be as high as 7) (50). | + |
| 10 | Compliance was calculated in terms of the number of completed exercise training sessions as prescribed out of a possible 24 sessions (49). | + |
| 11 | Self-reported inhaler training adherence (55) | + |
| 12 | Device adherence was defined as the percentage of days with valid step-count data (46). | + |
| Adherence for website engagement was examined by the number of log-ins to the website each month (46). | − | |
| 13 | Adherence was calculated as attendance at exercise sessions (seven sessions) (42). | − |
| 14 | Adherence was the percentage of days with completed measurements (forced spirometry, relaxed spirometry, SpO2, body temperature, blood pressure, weight) (40). | + |
| 15 | Adherence was measured using the Medication Adherence Report Scale (45). | − |
| Compliance was defined by the use of the system (days per week of use across all patients) (45). | + | |
| 16 | Adherence to pulmonary rehabilitation (47). | − |
| 17 | Compliance was defined as the use of the Respicard (expected 24 cards/6 months) | + |
| (Respicard is a clinical scoring system employed in the tele-assistance of COPD.) (56) | ||
| 18 | Treatment adherence was calculated in terms of attendance in the CST (coping skills training) phone calls (ranging from one to 14 sessions) (41). | + |
| 19 | Adherence to symptoms reports was defined as the number of reports made divided by the number of days enrolled in the program for each patient (54). | + |
| 20 | Adherence to medication was calculated as the percentage of prescribed doses taken. Adherence was also measured using the Medication Adherence Report Scale (43). | + |
| Adherence to the respiratory exercise was assessed by asking patients how many times they performed their respiratory exercises over the past week at the baseline and at follow-up (43). | + | |
| 21 | Adherence was defined as attendance in 80% of the sessions, including (rounded to) three sessions for home EPR (early pulmonary rehabilitation) (44). | + |
| Adherence was defined as attendance in 80% of the sessions, including 12 sessions for hospital EPR (early pulmonary rehabilitation) (44). | - |