Violeta Gaveikaite, Casandra Grundstrom, Stefan Winter, Ioanna Chouvarda, Nicos Maglaveras, Rita Priori, A systematic map and in-depth review of European telehealth interventions efficacy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Respiratory Medicine, Volume 158, 2019, Pages 78-88, ISSN 0954-6111, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2019.09.005
A systematic map and in-depth review of European telehealth interventions efficacy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
|Author:||Gaveikaite, Violeta1,2; Grundstrom, Casandra3; Winter, Stefan4;|
1Laboratory of Computing, Medical Informatics and Biomedical Imaging Technologies, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, 54636, Greece
2Department of Chronic Disease Management, Philips Research, High Tech Campus 34, Eindhoven, 5656AE, the Netherlands
3M3S, Department of Information Processing Science, University of Oulu, Pentti Kaiteran katu 1, Oulu, FI-90014, Finland
4Department of Chronic Disease Management, Philips Research, Pauwelsstraße 17, Aachen, 52074, Germany
5Department of IEMS in McCormick School of Engineering, Northwestern University, 2145 Sheridan Road Tech C210, Evanston, IL, 60208, USA
6Department of Smart Interfaces and Modules, Philips Research, High Tech Campus 34, Eindhoven, 5656AE, the Netherlands
|Persistent link:|| http://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi-fe2019101633200
|Publish Date:|| 2020-09-09
Background: Evidence to support the implementation of telehealth (TH) interventions in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) varies throughout Europe. Despite more than ten years of TH research in COPD management, it is still not possible to define which TH interventions are beneficial to which patient group. Therefore, informing policymakers on TH implementation is complicated. We aimed to examine the provision and efficacy of TH for COPD management to guide future decision-making.
Methods: A mapping study of twelve systematic reviews of TH interventions for COPD management was conducted. This was followed by an in-depth review of fourteen clinical trials performed in Europe extracted from the systematic reviews. Efficacy outcomes for COPD management were synthesized.
Results: The mapping study revealed that systematic reviews with a meta-analysis often report positive clinical outcomes. Despite this, we identified a lack of pragmatic trial design affecting the synthesis of reported outcomes. The in-depth review visualized outcomes for three TH categories, which revealed a plethora of heterogeneous outcomes. Suggestions for reporting within these three outcomes are synthesized as targets for future empirical research reporting.
Conclusion: The present study indicates the need for more standardized and updated systematic reviews. Policymakers should advocate for improved TH trial designs, focusing on the entire intervention’s adoption process evaluation. One of the policymakers’ priorities should be the harmonization of the outcome sets, which would be considered suitable for deciding about subsequent reimbursement. We propose possible outcome sets in three TH categories which could be used for discussion with stakeholders.
|Pages:||78 - 88|
|Type of Publication:||
A2 Review article in a scientific journal
|Field of Science:||
3141 Health care science
Authors V. Gaveikaite and C. Grundstrom have received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program - Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions Grant Agreement No. 676201 - CHESS - Connected Health Early Stage Researcher Support System.
|EU Grant Number:||
(676201) CHESS - Connected Health Early Stage Researcher Support System
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.