<b>Importance: </b>It remains unclear whether telemonitoring approaches provide benefits for patients with heart failure (HF) after hospitalization.<b>OBJECTIVE: </b>To evaluate the effectiveness of a care transition intervention using remote patient monitoring in reducing 180-day all-cause readmissions among a broad population of older adults hospitalized with HF.<b>Design, Setting, and Participants: </b>We randomized 1437 patients hospitalized for HF between October 12, 2011, and September 30, 2013, to the intervention arm (715 patients) or to the usual care arm (722 patients) of the Better Effectiveness After Transition-Heart Failure (BEAT-HF) study and observed them for 180 days. The dates of our study analysis were March 30, 2014, to October 1, 2015. The setting was 6 academic medical centers in California. Participants were hospitalized individuals 50 years or older who received active treatment for decompensated HF.<b>INTERVENTIONS: </b>The intervention combined health coaching telephone calls and telemonitoring. Telemonitoring used electronic equipment that collected daily information about blood pressure, heart rate, symptoms, and weight. Centralized registered nurses conducted telemonitoring reviews, protocolized actions, and telephone calls.<b>Main Outcomes and Measures: </b>The primary outcome was readmission for any cause within 180 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes were all-cause readmission within 30 days, all-cause mortality at 30 and 180 days, and quality of life at 30 and 180 days.<b>RESULTS: </b>Among 1437 participants, the median age was 73 years. Overall, 46.2% (664 of 1437) were female, and 22.0% (316 of 1437) were African American. The intervention and usual care groups did not differ significantly in readmissions for any cause 180 days after discharge, which occurred in 50.8% (363 of 715) and 49.2% (355 of 722) of patients, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20; P = .74). In secondary analyses, there were no significant differences in 30-day readmission or 180-day mortality, but there was a significant difference in 180-day quality of life between the intervention and usual care groups. No adverse events were reported.<b>Conclusions and Relevance: </b>Among patients hospitalized for HF, combined health coaching telephone calls and telemonitoring did not reduce 180-day readmissions.<b>Trial Registration: </b>clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01360203.
BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation provided through home visits is part of the continuum of care after discharge from hospital following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). As demands for rehabilitation at home are growing and becoming more difficult to meet, in-home telerehabilitation has been proposed as an alternate service delivery method. However, there is a need for robust data concerning both the effectiveness and the cost of dispensing in-home telerehabilitation. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to document, analyze, and compare real costs of two service delivery methods: in-home telerehabilitation and conventional home visits. METHODS: The economic analysis was conducted as part of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) on telerehabilitation for TKA, and involved data from 197 patients, post-TKA. Twice a week for 8 weeks, participants received supervised physiotherapy via two delivery methods, depending on their study group allocation: in-home telerehabilitation (TELE) and home-visit rehabilitation (VISIT). Patients were recruited from eight hospitals in the province of Quebec, Canada. The TELE group intervention was delivered by videoconferencing over high-speed Internet. The VISIT group received the same intervention at home. Costs related to the delivery of the two services (TELE and VISIT) were calculated. Student’s <i>t</i> tests were used to compare costs per treatment between the two groups. To take distance into account, the two treatment groups were compared within distance strata using two-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs). RESULTS: The mean cost of a single session was Can $93.08 for the VISIT group (SD $35.70) and $80.99 for the TELE group (SD $26.60). When comparing both groups, real total cost analysis showed a cost differential in favor of the TELE group (TELE minus VISIT: -$263, 95% CI -$382 to -$143). However, when the patient’s home was located less than 30 km round-trip from the health care center, the difference in costs between TELE and VISIT treatments was not significant (<i>P</i> = .25, .26, and .11 for the <10, 10-19, and 20-29 km strata, respectively). The cost of TELE treatments was lower than VISIT treatments when the distance was 30 km or more (30-49 km: $81<$103, <i>P</i> = .002; >50 km: $90<$152, <i>P</i><.001). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study of the actual costs of in-home telerehabilitation covering all subcosts of telerehabilitation and distance between the health care center and the patient’s home. The cost for a single session of in-home telerehabilitation compared to conventional home-visit rehabilitation was lower or about the same, depending on the distance between the patient’s home and health care center. Under the controlled conditions of an RCT, a favorable cost differential was observed when the patient was more than 30 km from the provider. Stakeholders and program planners can use these data to guide decisions regarding introducing telerehabilitation as a new service in their clinic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)
OBJECTIVES: There have been very few assessments of the economics of home telemonitoring, and the quality of evidence has often been weakened by methodological flaws. This has made it difficult to compare telehomecare with traditional home care for the chronic diseases studied. This economic analysis is an attempt to address this gap in the literature.
METHODS: We have analyzed the consumption of healthcare services by 95 patients with various chronic diseases over a 21-month period, that is, 12 months before, 4 months during home telemonitoring use, and over 5 months after withdraw of the technology.
RESULTS: Our findings indicate significant benefits to the home telemonitoring program as evidenced by large reductions in number of hospitalizations, length of average hospital stay, and, to a lesser extent, number of emergency room visits. Contrary to expectations, however, the number of home visits by nurses increased both during and after the telemonitoring intervention. In terms of the financial analysis, the telehomecare program resulted in significant savings: the equivalent of over CAD1,557 per patient as calculated on an annualized basis. This represents a net gain of 41 percent as compared to traditional home care.
CONCLUSIONS: While the present economic analysis led to positive results, additional assessments should be conducted to confirm the cost-effectiveness of this mode of care delivery.
BACKGROUND: This study was designed to determine whether physician-led remote telemedical management (RTM) compared with usual care would result in reduced mortality in ambulatory patients with chronic heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 710 stable chronic HF patients in New York Heart Association functional class II or III with a left ventricular ejection fraction <=35% and a history of HF decompensation within the previous 2 years or with a left ventricular ejection fraction <=25%. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to RTM or usual care. Remote telemedical management used portable devices for ECG, blood pressure, and body weight measurements connected to a personal digital assistant that sent automated encrypted transmission via cell phones to the telemedical centers. The primary end point was death from any cause. The first secondary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death and hospitalization for HF. Baseline characteristics were similar between the RTM (n=354) and control (n=356) groups. Of the patients assigned to RTM, 287 (81%) were at least 70% compliant with daily data transfers and no break for >30 days (except during hospitalizations). The median follow-up was 26 months (minimum 12), and was 99.9% complete. Compared with usual care, RTM had no significant effect on all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 1.41; P=0.87) or on cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 1.19; P=0.44). CONCLUSIONS: In ambulatory patients with chronic HF, RTM compared with usual care was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00543881.
Importance: It remains unclear whether telemonitoring approaches provide benefits for patients with heart failure (HF) after hospitalization.
OBJECTIVE:
To evaluate the effectiveness of a care transition intervention using remote patient monitoring in reducing 180-day all-cause readmissions among a broad population of older adults hospitalized with HF.Design, Setting, and Participants: We randomized 1437 patients hospitalized for HF between October 12, 2011, and September 30, 2013, to the intervention arm (715 patients) or to the usual care arm (722 patients) of the Better Effectiveness After Transition-Heart Failure (BEAT-HF) study and observed them for 180 days. The dates of our study analysis were March 30, 2014, to October 1, 2015. The setting was 6 academic medical centers in California. Participants were hospitalized individuals 50 years or older who received active treatment for decompensated HF.
INTERVENTIONS:
The intervention combined health coaching telephone calls and telemonitoring. Telemonitoring used electronic equipment that collected daily information about blood pressure, heart rate, symptoms, and weight. Centralized registered nurses conducted telemonitoring reviews, protocolized actions, and telephone calls.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was readmission for any cause within 180 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes were all-cause readmission within 30 days, all-cause mortality at 30 and 180 days, and quality of life at 30 and 180 days.
RESULTS:
Among 1437 participants, the median age was 73 years. Overall, 46.2% (664 of 1437) were female, and 22.0% (316 of 1437) were African American. The intervention and usual care groups did not differ significantly in readmissions for any cause 180 days after discharge, which occurred in 50.8% (363 of 715) and 49.2% (355 of 722) of patients, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20; P = .74). In secondary analyses, there were no significant differences in 30-day readmission or 180-day mortality, but there was a significant difference in 180-day quality of life between the intervention and usual care groups. No adverse events were reported.Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients hospitalized for HF, combined health coaching telephone calls and telemonitoring did not reduce 180-day readmissions.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01360203.
