A randomized clinical trial of home telemonitoring in patients with advanced heart and lung diseases.

2021 ◽  
pp. 1357633X2110597
Author(s):  
Carlos Hernandez-Quiles ◽  
Máximo Bernabeu-Wittel ◽  
Bosco Barón-Franco ◽  
Alfonso Aguirre Palacios ◽  
M Rocio Garcia-Serrano ◽  
...  

Brief Summary The addition of home monitoring to an integrated care model in patients with advanced chronic heart/lung diseases decreases mortality, hospital and emergency admissions, improves functional status, HRQoL, and is cost-effective. Background Telemonitoring is a promising implement for medicine, but its efficacy is unknown in patients with advanced heart and lung failure (AHLF). Objective To determine the efficacy of a telemonitoring system added to coordinated clinical care in patients with AHLF. Design Randomized phase 3 multicenter clinical trial with parallel groups in adult patients. Participants Five spanish centers including patients with AHLF at discharge or in out-patient clinics. Intervention Patients were randomly assigned to receive a remote bio-parameters telemonitoring system (TELECARE) or best usual care (UCARE). TELECARE patients were provided with devices that collected symptoms and bio-parameters, and transferred them synchronously to a call-center, with a real-time health-care response. Main Measures Primary end point was the need of admissions/emergency room visits at 45, 90, 180 days. Secondary end points included health care requirements, mortality, functional assessment, health related quality of life (HRQoL), perceived satisfaction, and cost-efficacy. Results 510 patients were included (54.5% women, median age 76.5 years; 63.1% suffered heart failure, 13.9% lung failure, and 22.9% both conditions). Clinical and functional features were comparable in both arms. TELECARE globally needed less admissions with respect UCARE after 45 days of inclusion (35.4% vs. 46.9%, p < 0.05). This tendency was maintained in the subgroups of patients with multimorbidity (34.2% vs. 46.9%, p < 0.05), intermediate risk of mortality (36.5% vs. 51.1%, p < 0.05), and those included after hospital discharge (34.9% vs. 50.5%, p < 0.01). HRQoL significantly improved (TELECARE/UCARE EuroQol baseline of 56.2 ± 18.2/55.1 ± 19.7, p = 0.054, and 64 ± 19.9/56.3 ± 21.6; p < 0.01 at the end), and perceived satisfaction was also higher (6.77 ± 0.52 vs. 6.62 ± 0.81, p < 0.001; highest possible score = 7). A trend to mortality decrease was also observed (12.9% vs. 19.3%, p = 0.13). TELECARE was cost-efficacious (TELECARE/UCARE QALY 3.94 Euros/0.81Euros). Conclusions The addition of a telemonitoring system to an integrated care model in patients with AHLF decreases hospital and emergency admissions, improves functional status as well as HRQoL, and is cost-efficacious.

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet H. Van Cleave ◽  
Brian L. Egleston ◽  
Sarah Brosch ◽  
Elizabeth Wirth ◽  
Molly Lawson ◽  
...  

Providing affordable, high-quality care for the 10 million persons who are dual-eligible beneficiaries of Medicare and Medicaid is an ongoing health-care policy challenge in the United States. However, the workforce and the care provided to dual-eligible beneficiaries are understudied. The purpose of this article is to provide a narrative of the challenges and lessons learned from an exploratory study in the use of clinical and administrative data to compare the workforce of two care models that deliver home- and community-based services to dual-eligible beneficiaries. The research challenges that the study team encountered were as follows: (a) comparing different care models, (b) standardizing data across care models, and (c) comparing patterns of health-care utilization. The methods used to meet these challenges included expert opinion to classify data and summative content analysis to compare and count data. Using descriptive statistics, a summary comparison of the two care models suggested that the coordinated care model workforce provided significantly greater hours of care per recipient than the integrated care model workforce. This likely represented the coordinated care model's focus on providing in-home services for one recipient, whereas the integrated care model focused on providing services in a day center with group activities. The lesson learned from this exploratory study is the need for standardized quality measures across home- and community-based services agencies to determine the workforce that best meets the needs of dual-eligible beneficiaries.


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E. Sudano ◽  
Greg Collins ◽  
Christopher M. Miles

2021 ◽  
pp. 205715852110621
Author(s):  
Lina Hovlin ◽  
Catharina Gillsjö ◽  
Anna K. Dahl Aslan ◽  
Jenny Hallgren

An increasing number of older persons have complex health care needs. This, along with the organizational principle of remaining at home, emphasizes the need to develop collaborations among organizations caring for older persons. A health care model developed in Sweden, the Mobile Integrated Care Model aims to promote work in teams across organizations. The aim of the study was to describe nurses’ experiences in working and providing health care in the Mobile Integrated Care Model in the home with home health care physicians. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 nurses and analyzed through qualitative content analysis. The method was compliant with the COREQ checklist. A mutually trusting collaboration with physicians, which formed person-centered care, created work satisfaction for the nurses. Working within the Mobile Integrated Care Model was negatively impacted by being employed by different organizations, lack of time to provide health care, and physicians’ person-centered work abilities.


2020 ◽  
pp. 135581962096350
Author(s):  
Jonathan Stokes ◽  
Vishalie Shah ◽  
Leontine Goldzahl ◽  
Søren Rud Kristensen ◽  
Matt Sutton

Objectives To examine the effectiveness of two integrated care models (‘vanguards’) in Salford and South Somerset in England, United Kingdom, in relation to patient experience, health outcomes and costs of care (the ‘triple aim’). Methods We used difference-in-differences analysis combined with propensity score weighting to compare the two care model sites with control (‘usual care’) areas in the rest of England. We estimated combined and separate annual effects in the three years following introduction of the new care model, using the national General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS) to measure patient experience (inter-organisational support with chronic condition management) and generic health status (EQ-5D); and hospital episode statistics (HES) data to measure total costs of secondary care. As secondary outcomes we measured proxies for improved prevention: cost per user of secondary care (severity); avoidable emergency admissions; and primary care utilisation. Results Both intervention sites showed an increase in total costs of secondary care (approximately £74 per registered patient per year in Salford, £45 in South Somerset) and cost per user of secondary care (£130–138 per person per year). There were no statistically significant effects on health status or patient experience of care. There was a more apparent short-term negative effect on measured outcomes in South Somerset, in terms of increased costs and avoidable emergency admissions, but these reduced over time. Conclusion New care models such as those implemented within the Vanguard programme in England might lead to unintended secondary care cost increases in the short to medium term. Cost increases appeared to be driven by average patient severity increases in hospital. Prevention-focused population health management models of integrated care, like previous more targeted models, do not immediately improve the health system’s triple aim.


2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Saxon ◽  
Daniel R. Kivlahan ◽  
Donelle Howell

Author(s):  
Peter J. Huckfeldt ◽  
Jing Gu ◽  
José J. Escarce ◽  
Pinar Karaca‐Mandic ◽  
Neeraj Sood

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document