Dataset Information

Real-World Experience of mHealth Implementation in Clinical Practice (the Box): Design and Usability Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mobile health (mHealth) is an emerging field of scientific interest worldwide. Potential benefits include increased patient engagement, improved clinical outcomes, and reduced health care costs. However, mHealth is often studied in projects or trials, and structural implantation in clinical practice is less common.

Objective

The purpose of this paper is to outline the design of the Box and its implementation and use in an outpatient clinic setting. The impact on logistical outcomes and patient and provider satisfaction is discussed.

Methods

In 2016, an mHealth care track including smartphone-compatible devices, named the Box, was implemented in the cardiology department of a tertiary medical center in the Netherlands. Patients with myocardial infarction, rhythm disorders, cardiac surgery, heart failure, and congenital heart disease received devices to measure daily weight, blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, and oxygen saturation. In addition, professional and patient user comments on the experience with the care track were obtained via structured interviews.

Results

From 2016 to April 2020, a total of 1140 patients were connected to the mHealth care track. On average, a Box cost €350 (US $375), not including extra staff costs. The median patient age was 60.8 (IQR 52.9-69.3) years, and 73.59% (839/1140) were male. A median of 260 (IQR 105-641) measurements was taken on a median of 189 (IQR 98-372) days. Patients praised the ease of use of the devices and felt more involved with their illness and care. Professionals reported more productive outpatient consultations as well as improved insight into health parameters such as blood pressure and weight. A feedback loop from the hospital to patient to focus on measurements was commented as an important improvement by both patients and professionals.

Conclusions

In this study, the design and implementation of an mHealth care track for outpatient follow-up of patients with various cardiovascular diseases is described. Data from these 4 years indicate that mHealth is feasible to incorporate in outpatient management and is generally well-accepted by patients and providers. Limitations include the need for manual measurement data checks and the risk of data overload. Moreover, the tertiary care setting in which the Box was introduced may limit the external validity of logistical and financial end points to other medical centers. More evidence is needed to show the effects of mHealth on clinical outcomes and on cost-effectiveness.

SUBMITTER: Biersteker T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8726018 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:This study describes how health care providers approach canagliflozin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the real world.An Internet-based questionnaire was completed by 101 endocrinologists, 101 primary care physicians, and 100 nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NP/PAs). Health care providers were required to have experience prescribing or managing patients using canagliflozin to be included in the study. Health care providers compared canagliflozin with other T2DM medication classes on clinical characteristics, costs, and patient satisfaction. Confidence in canagliflozin was also measured. Health care providers reported their canagliflozin prescribing experience and good candidate characteristics for treatment. Finally, providers reported on patient outcomes among those receiving canagliflozin. All variables were compared across provider type.Health care providers reported higher favorability for canagliflozin for blood pressure and body weight compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and higher favorability for effect on blood pressure, body weight, treatment satisfaction, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) compared with sulfonylureas (SUs), with differences observed for effect on blood pressure. Health care providers reported being very/extremely confident (55%-74%) with canagliflozin as a second-to fourth-line treatment. The top 3 characteristics reported by the providers, in terms of describing a good candidate for canagliflozin, include those concerned about their weight, insurance coverage/affordability, and avoiding injectable treatments. Finally, providers reported often/always observing patients' lowering or controlling HbA1c (82%-88%) and improvement in overall quality of life (QoL; 50%-53%) with canagliflozin treatment. No differences were observed across provider type for confidence, good candidate characteristics, or patient outcomes.Health care providers reported favorable experiences with canagliflozin and witnessed improvements in patients' clinical outcomes and QoL.

Project description:This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of tocilizumab use for the treatment of active steroid-resistant Graves' orbitopathy (GO). A retrospective longitudinal study was conducted by reviewing the medical records at a single center between November 2009 and December 2018. A total of 114 patients with steroid-resistant Graves' orbitopathy were examined and treated with tocilizumab, of which 54 adults met the inclusion criteria. No concomitant medication for the treatment of orbitopathy was used. The main primary outcomes included changes from baseline in the Clinical Activity Score (CAS) and thyrotropin receptor antibody (TRAb) levels throughout therapy with tocilizumab. The absolute responses to treatment were defined as the achievement of CAS ≤ 1 and TRAb ≤ 10 U/L. A composite ophthalmic score including CAS, proptosis, eyelid retraction, and diplopia was used to evaluate individual improvement in GO. Adverse drug reactions were also assessed. Analysis of the patient's CAS and TRAb levels showed meaningful reductions during tocilizumab treatment. Differences between values at baseline and subsequent time points were statistically significant (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The absolute CAS response (CAS = 0 or 1) was achieved in 74% (37/50) of patients after the fourth dose of tocilizumab (at week 16), with a TRAb response being achieved in 55% (23/42) of patients. The relative CAS response (reduction ≥ 2 points) was achieved in 90.9% of patients (40/44) after the first dose of tocilizumab (at week 4). Measurements of proptosis (reduction ≥ 2 mm in 78% of patients, 42/54) and eyelid retraction (reduction ≥ 2 mm in 75%, 33/44), and the prevalence of diplopia (improvement in 68%, 19/28) were significantly reduced after the last dose of tocilizumab (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). GO improved in 98% (53/54) of patients when at least two criteria of the composite evaluation were required. Four patients exhibited disease recurrence, defined as an increase in CAS of ≥2 points in the six months following the date of inactivation. Most adverse drug reactions were mild or moderate in severity. In conclusion, our data suggest that a course of at least 4 months (one monthly dose) of tocilizumab therapy provides a significant benefit to patients with active moderate-to-severe steroid-resistant GO.