Dataset Information

Assessing Communication during Remote Follow-Up of Users with Pacemakers in Norway: The NORDLAND Study, a Randomized Trial.

ABSTRACT: As effective communication is a key ingredient for the provision of quality healthcare services, this study aimed to explore the communication experiences in the remote monitoring of older adults with a pacemaker. The study was based on a non-masked randomized observational design. The Healthcare Communication Questionnaire and in-depth interviews were conducted for data collection. A total of 49 patients participated in the study. The study findings reveal overall positive communication experiences by pacemaker users in remote monitoring with no significant differences from users in hospital monitoring. The remote option is perceived as safe and convenient, and communicating with the clinicians from home is considered comfortable and confidential. The study provides insights into the content of communication experiences in telehealth and practical implications in healthcare contexts. In a world that increasingly relies on remote communication, it is crucial to match technologies to patient needs and assess communication with patients. This will ensure the success of new models of care and establish appropriate criteria for the use of telehealth services. These criteria are all relevant in the implementation of health technology in the future as a part of effective patient-centered care.

SUBMITTER: Catalan-Matamoros D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7589429 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing Communication during Remote Follow-Up of Users with Pacemakers in Norway: The NORDLAND Study, a Randomized Trial.

Catalan-Matamoros Daniel D Lopez-Villegas Antonio A Lappegård Knut Tore KT Lopez-Liria Remedios R

International journal of environmental research and public health 20201021 20

As effective communication is a key ingredient for the provision of quality healthcare services, this study aimed to explore the communication experiences in the remote monitoring of older adults with a pacemaker. The study was based on a non-masked randomized observational design. The Healthcare Communication Questionnaire and in-depth interviews were conducted for data collection. A total of 49 patients participated in the study. The study findings reveal overall positive communication experie ...[more]

PMID: 33096736

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The aim of our study was to perform an economic assessment in order to check whether or not telemonitoring of users with pacemakers offers a cost-effective alternative to traditional follow-up in outpatient clinics. METHODS:We used effectiveness and cost data from the NORDLAND trial, which is a controlled, randomized, non-masked clinical trial. Fifty patients were assigned to receive either telemonitoring (TM; n = 25) or conventional monitoring (CM; n = 25) and were followed up for 12 months after the implantation. A cost-utility analysis was performed in terms of additional costs per additional Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) attained from the perspectives of the Norwegian National Healthcare System and patients and their caregivers. RESULTS:Effectiveness was similar between alternatives (TM: 0.7804 [CI: 0.6864 to 0.8745] vs. CM: 0.7465 [CI: 0.6543 to 0.8387]), while cost per patient was higher in the RM group, both from the Norwegian NHS perspective (TM: €2,079.84 [CI: 0.00 to 4,610.58] vs. €271.97 [CI: 158.18 to 385.76]; p = 0.147) and including the patient/family perspective (TM: €2,295.91 [CI: 0.00 to 4,843.28] vs. CM: €430.39 [CI: 0.00 to 4,841.48]), although these large differences-mainly due to a few patients being hospitalized in the TM group, as opposed to none in the CM group-did not reach statistical significance. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) from the Norwegian NHS perspective (€53,345.27/QALY) and including the patient/caregiver perspective (€55,046.40/QALY), as well as the Incremental Net Benefit (INB), favors the CM alternative, albeit with very broad 95%CIs. The probabilistic analysis confirmed inconclusive results due to the wide CIs even suggesting that TM was not cost-effective in this study. Supplemental analysis excluding the hospitalization costs shows positive INBs, whereby suggesting a discrete superiority of the RM alternative if hospitalization costs were not considered, albeit also with broad CIs. CONCLUSIONS:Cost-utility analysis of TM vs. CM shows inconclusive results because of broad confidence intervals with ICER and INB figures ranging from potential savings to high costs for an additional QALY, with the majority of ICERs being above the usual NHS thresholds for coverage decisions. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237404.

Project description:BACKGROUND:With an ageing population and widening indications for pacemakers implantation, the number of persons carrying an implant is steadily increasing. The routine follow-up is thus a heavy burden for the respective NHS as well as for the patients and their relatives. Most of them of the studies have been performed in densely populated areas and nearby to the hospital. It is thus unknown whether these results could be applied also in rural areas such as Northern Norway with a more scattered population. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of tele-monitoring (TM) in patients with pacemakers regarding reliability, safety and health-related quality of life, compared to traditional follow-up in outpatient clinic in a setting where geographical effects could possible influence the results. METHODS:The NORDLAND study is a controlled, randomized, non-masked clinical trial in pacemaker patients, with data collection carried out during the pre-implant stage and after 6 months. Between August of 2014 and November of 2015, 50 patients were assigned to either a tele-monitoring group (n =?25) or a conventional hospital monitoring (HM) group (n =?25). The EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) utilities and visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) were used to measure Health-Related Quality of Life. Baseline characteristics and number of hospital visits were also analyzed. RESULTS:The baseline characteristics of the two study groups were similar for EQ-5D utilities (TM:0.81; HM:0.76; p =?0.47), EQ-5D VAS (TM: 64.00; HM:64.88; p =?0.86) and the MLHFQ (TM:20.20; HM:28.96; p =?0.07). At the 6 month follow-up, there were no significant differences between the groups in EQ-5D utilities (TM: 0.81; HM: 0.76; p =?0.54) and EQ-5D VAS scores (TM: 72.71; HM: 59.79; p =?0.08). The MLHFQ score was improved in both groups (TM: -4.40; HM: -15.13; p <? 0.001). The number of in-office visits was similar in both groups (TM: 1.24 vs HM: 1.12; P = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS:The NORDLAND trial shows that HRQoL is improved after implant in both groups. Without significant differences with regards to effectiveness and safety. In addition, provides a scientifically rigorous method to the field of HRQoL evaluations in patients with pacemakers. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02237404 , September 11, 2014.

Project description:BackgroundThe concept of 'patient experience' has become central to how to improve healthcare. Remote communication with patients is today a frequent practice in healthcare services, showing similar outcomes to standard outpatient care while enabling cost reduction in both formal and informal care. The purpose of this study was to analyse the experiences of people with telemonitoring pacemakers.MethodsPatients were randomly allocated to either the telemonitoring or hospital monitoring follow-ups. Using the 'Generic Short Patient Experiences Questionnaire' (GS-PEQ), as well as an ad-hoc survey from the 'telehealth patient satisfaction survey' and 'costs survey', patients' experiences were measured six months after the pacemaker implant in a cohort of 50 consecutive patients. The mean age was 74.8 (± 11.75) years and 26 (52%) patients were male of which 1 was lost in follow-up. Finally, 24 patients were followed up with standard hospital monitoring, while 25 used the telemonitoring system. Differences in baseline characteristics between groups were not found.ResultsFindings showed overall positive and similar experiences in patients living with telemonitoring and hospital monitoring pacemakers. Significant differences were found in GS-PEQ concerning how telemonitoring patients received less information about their diagnosis/afflictions (p = 0.046). We did not find significant differences in other items such as 'confidence in the clinicians' professional skills', 'treatment perception adapted to their situation', 'involvement in decisions regarding the treatment', 'perception of hospital organisation', 'waiting before admission', 'satisfaction of help and treatment received', 'benefit received', and 'incorrect treatment'.ConclusionsThe remote communication of pacemakers was met with positive levels of patients' experiences similarly to patients in the hospital monitoring follow-up. However, telemonitoring patients received less information. Thus, improving the quality and timing of information is required in telemonitoring patients in the planning and organisation of future remote communication healthcare services for people living with a pacemaker implant.

Project description:Patients with pacemakers need regular follow-ups which are demanding. Telemonitoring for pacemaker can provide a new opportunity to avoid follow-up visits. On the other hand, in-person visits could help patients with pacemakers to cope better with the anxiety linked to their condition and maintain better communication with their doctors than simple remote control of their device status. Therefore, our objective was to analyze the experiences and communication comparing telemonitoring (TM) versus conventional monitoring (CM) of patients with pacemakers. A single-center, controlled, non-randomized, non-blinded clinical trial was designed. Data were collected five years after implantation in a cohort of 89 consecutive patients assigned to two different groups: TM and CM. The 'Generic Short Patient Experiences Questionnaire' (GS-PEQ) was used to assess patients' experiences, and the Healthcare Communication Questionnaire (HCCQ) was used to measure the communication of patients with healthcare professionals. Additionally, an ad-hoc survey including items from the 'Telehealth Patient Satisfaction Survey' and a 'costs survey' was used. After five years, 55 patients completed the study (TM = 21; CM = 34). Participants' mean (±SD) age was 81 (±6.47), and 31% were females. No differences in baseline characteristics between groups were found. The comparative analyses TM versus CM showed some significant differences. According to GS-PEQ, TM users received adequate information about their diagnosis or afflictions (p = .035) and the treatment was better adapted to their situation (p = .009). Both groups reported negative experiences regarding their involvement in their treatment decisions, the waiting time before admission, and perceived a low-benefit. According to HCCQ, the TM group experienced poorer consultation management by the healthcare provider (p = .041). Participants reported positive overall communication experiences. The study provides insights into the experiences and communication in PM monitoring services as well as specific areas where users reported negative experiences such as the consultation management by clinicians. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02234245.

Project description:BackgroundCataract surgery has become one of the most performed surgical procedures worldwide. Postoperative management consists of routine clinical examinations to assess post-operative visual function and detect possible adverse events. Due to the low incidence of complications, the majority of clinic visits after cataract surgery are uneventful. Nonetheless, valuable time and hospital resources are consumed. We hypothesize that remote post-operative follow-up involving teleconsultations and self-assessments of visual function and health status, could be a valid alternative to face-to-face clinical examinations in selected patient groups. The practice of remote follow-up after cataract surgery has not yet been evaluated. The aim of this study is to investigate the validity, safety and cost-effectiveness of remote cataract surgery follow-up, and to report on the patients' experiences with remotely self-assessing visual function.MethodsThis study is a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Patients planned for cataract surgery on both eyes, without ocular comorbidities, are eligible for participation. Participants will be allocated (1:1) into one of the two study groups: 'telemonitoring' or 'usual care'. Participants in the 'telemonitoring' group will perform in-home assessments after cataract surgery (remote web-based eye exams and digital questionnaires on their own devices). Participants in the 'usual care' group will have regular post-operative consultations, according to the study site's regular practice. Outcome measures include accuracy of the web-based eye exam for assessing visual acuity and refraction, patient-reported outcome measures (visual function and quality of life), adverse events, and cost aspects.DiscussionInvestigating remote follow-up after cataract surgery fits the current trends of digitization of health care. We believe that remote self-care can be a promising avenue to comply with the increasing demands of cataract care. This randomized controlled trial provides scientific evidence on this unmet need and delivers the desired insights on (cost)effectiveness of remote follow-up after cataract surgery.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04809402. Date of registration: March 22, 2021.

Project description:Purpose Individuals with primary progressive apraxia of speech have apraxia of speech (AOS) as the initial and predominant symptom. Many develop aphasia and/or dysarthria later in the disease course. It was previously demonstrated that patients with neurodegenerative AOS experience reduced participation in communication that is further exacerbated by co-occurring language deficits (Utianski et al., 2020). Measures of disease severity did not necessarily correlate with measures of participation restrictions. The aim of this follow-up study was to describe changes in communication limitations in these patients, again measured by (a) the patient via the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB) and (b) the speech-language pathologist via the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's (ASHA's) Functional Communication Measures (FCMs) and an adapted motor speech disorder (MSD) severity rating to determine if there are significant changes in these and other objective speech and language measures at follow-up after 1 year. Method Of the 24 patients reported in the study of Utianski et al. (2020), 17 (10 men, seven women) returned for a second visit approximately 1 year following the first visit. Identical procedures were utilized; the communication measures collected at each visit were statistically compared. Correlations were calculated between the participation ratings and other clinical assessment measures at the second visit and for the change in scores on those measures between the first and second visits. Results There were statistically significant differences in AOS and aphasia severity between visits. There were significant changes in clinical assessments, MSD severity rating, and all ASHA FCMs between visits, but not the CPIB. Correlation analyses suggest the relationships among clinical and participation measures are complex; overall, patients with more severe changes in AOS experienced greater changes in participation restrictions. Conclusions The findings of this study support the use of patient-reported outcome measures as they may better reflect the patient experience, including the influence of factors such as ongoing speech therapy and the emergence of neuropsychiatric features, and associated changes in day-to-day functioning, when other measures may simply index the progression of the disease. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16528512.

Dataset Information

Assessing Communication during Remote Follow-Up of Users with Pacemakers in Norway: The NORDLAND Study, a Randomized Trial.

Publications

Assessing Communication during Remote Follow-Up of Users with Pacemakers in Norway: The NORDLAND Study, a Randomized Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets