Effective technologies for noninvasive remote monitoring in heart failure

Background Trials of new technologies to remotely monitor for signs and symptoms of worsening heart failure are continually emerging. The extent to which technological differences impact the effectiveness of non-invasive remote monitoring for heart failure management is unknown. Objective To examine the effect of specific technology used for non-invasive remote monitoring of people with heart failure on all-cause mortality and heart failure-related hospitalisations. Methods A sub-analysis of a large systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Studies were stratified according to the specific type of technology used and separate meta-analyses were performed. Four different types of non-invasive remote monitoring technologies were identified including structured telephone calls, videophone, interactive voice response devices and telemonitoring. Results Only structured telephone calls and telemonitoring were effective in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.87; 95% CI=0.75-1.01; p=0.06 and 0.62; 95% CI=0.50-0.77; p<0.0001) and heart failure-related hospitalisations (RR 0.77; 95% CI=0.68-0.87; p<0.001) and 0.75; 95% CI=0.63-0.91; p=0.003). More research data is required for videophone and interactive voice response technologies. Conclusions This sub-analysis identified that only two of the four specific technologies used for non-invasive remote monitoring in heart failure improved outcomes. When results of studies that involved these disparate technologies were combined in previous meta-analyses, significant improvements in outcomes were identified. As such, this study has highlighted implications for future meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials focused on evaluating the effectiveness of remote monitoring in heart failure

Impact of remote patient monitoring on clinical outcomes: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Despite growing interest in remote patient monitoring, limited evidence exists to substantiate claims of its ability to improve outcomes. Our aim was to evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assess the effects of using wearable biosensors (e.g. activity trackers) for remote patient monitoring on clinical outcomes. We expanded upon prior reviews by assessing effectiveness across indications and presenting quantitative summary data. We searched for articles from January 2000 to October 2016 in PubMed, reviewed 4,348 titles, selected 777 for abstract review, and 64 for full text review. A total of 27 RCTs from 13 different countries focused on a range of clinical outcomes and were retained for final analysis; of these, we identified 16 high-quality studies. We estimated a difference-in-differences random effects meta-analysis on select outcomes. We weighted the studies by sample size and used 95% confidence intervals (CI) around point estimates. Difference-in-difference point estimation revealed no statistically significant impact of remote patient monitoring on any of six reported clinical outcomes, including body mass index (−0.73; 95% CI: −1.84, 0.38), weight (−1.29; −3.06, 0.48), waist circumference (−2.41; −5.16, 0.34), body fat percentage (0.11; −1.56, 1.34), systolic blood pressure (−2.62; −5.31, 0.06), and diastolic blood pressure (−0.99; −2.73, 0.74). Studies were highly heterogeneous in their design, device type, and outcomes. Interventions based on health behavior models and personalized coaching were most successful. We found substantial gaps in the evidence base that should be considered before implementation of remote patient monitoring in the clinical setting

Do patients have a say? A narrative review of the development of patient-reported outcome measures used in elective procedures for coronary revascularisation

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capture health information from the patient’s perspective that can be used when weighing up benefits, risks and costs of treatment. This is important for elective procedures such as those for coronary revascularisation. Patients should be involved in the development of PROMs to accurately capture outcomes that are important for the patient. The aims of this review are to identify if patients were involved in the development of cardiovascular-specific PROMs used for assessing outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation, and to explore what methods were used to capture patient perspectives. Methods: PROMs for evaluating outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation were identified from a previous review and an updated systematic search. The studies describing the development of the PROMs were reviewed for information on patient input in their conceptual and/or item development. Results: 24 PROMs were identified from a previous review and three additional PROMs were identified from the updated search. Full texts were obtained for 26 of the 27 PROMs. The 26 studies (11 multidimensional, 15 unidimensional) were reviewed. Only nine studies reported developing PROMs using patient input. For eight PROMs, the inclusion of patient input could not be judged due to insufficient information in the full text. Conclusions: Only nine of the 26 reviewed PROMs used in elective coronary revascularisation reported involving patients in their conceptual and/or item development, while patient input was unclear for eight PROMs. These findings suggest that the patient’s perspective is often overlooked or poorly described in the development of PROMs