A Web Application for Self-Monitoring Improves Symptoms in Chronic Systolic Heart Failure

Dorsch, Michael P.; Farris, Karen B.; Bleske, Barry E.; Koelling, Todd M.

doi:10.1089/tmj.2014.0095

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evaluative research in this area has found a mixed picture in terms of the impact of patient monitoring on self-management and patient outcomes. 313,318,[372][373][374][375] Mixed-methods research is needed to explore the contexts in which and mechanisms through which these interventions achieve their intended outcomes.…”

Section: Recommendations For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care

Greenhalgh

Dalkin

Gooding

et al. 2017

Health Serv Deliv Res

177

263

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe feedback of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data is intended to support the care of individual patients and to act as a quality improvement (QI) strategy.ObjectivesTo (1) identify the ideas and assumptions underlying how individual and aggregated PROMs data are intended to improve patient care, and (2) review the evidence to examine the circumstances in which and processes through which PROMs feedback improves patient care.DesignTwo separate but related realist syntheses: (1) feedback of aggregate PROMs and performance data to improve patient care, and (2) feedback of individual PROMs data to improve patient care.InterventionsAggregate – feedback and public reporting of PROMs, patient experience data and performance data to hospital providers and primary care organisations. Individual – feedback of PROMs in oncology, palliative care and the care of people with mental health problems in primary and secondary care settings.Main outcome measuresAggregate – providers’ responses, attitudes and experiences of using PROMs and performance data to improve patient care. Individual – providers’ and patients’ experiences of using PROMs data to raise issues with clinicians, change clinicians’ communication practices, change patient management and improve patient well-being.Data sourcesSearches of electronic databases and forwards and backwards citation tracking.Review methodsRealist synthesis to identify, test and refine programme theories about when, how and why PROMs feedback leads to improvements in patient care.ResultsProviders were more likely to take steps to improve patient care in response to the feedback and public reporting of aggregate PROMs and performance data if they perceived that these data were credible, were aimed at improving patient care, and were timely and provided a clear indication of the source of the problem. However, implementing substantial and sustainable improvement to patient care required system-wide approaches. In the care of individual patients, PROMs function more as a tool to support patients in raising issues with clinicians than they do in substantially changing clinicians’ communication practices with patients. Patients valued both standardised and individualised PROMs as a tool to raise issues, but thought is required as to which patients may benefit and which may not. In settings such as palliative care and psychotherapy, clinicians viewed individualised PROMs as useful to build rapport and support the therapeutic process. PROMs feedback did not substantially shift clinicians’ communication practices or focus discussion on psychosocial issues; this required a shift in clinicians’ perceptions of their remit.Strengths and limitationsThere was a paucity of research examining the feedback of aggregate PROMs data to providers, and we drew on evidence from interventions with similar programme theories (other forms of performance data) to test our theories.ConclusionsPROMs data act as ‘tin openers’ rather than ‘dials’. Providers need more support and guidance on how to collect their own internal data, how to rule out alternative explanations for their outlier status and how to explore the possible causes of their outlier status. There is also tension between PROMs as a QI strategy versus their use in the care of individual patients; PROMs that clinicians find useful in assessing patients, such as individualised measures, are not useful as indicators of service quality.Future workFuture research should (1) explore how differently performing providers have responded to aggregate PROMs feedback, and how organisations have collected PROMs data both for individual patient care and to improve service quality; and (2) explore whether or not and how incorporating PROMs into patients’ electronic records allows multiple different clinicians to receive PROMs feedback, discuss it with patients and act on the data to improve patient care.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005938.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

show abstract

Section: Recommendations For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care

Greenhalgh

Dalkin

Gooding

et al. 2017

Health Serv Deliv Res

177

263

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the vast scientific literature on telemedicine systems, we have found only a few reports of systems that use data and information coming directly from patients [ 22 - 27 ], although several systems, as for example Philips’ eCareCompanion and eCareCoordinator [ 28 ], are now moving on to collecting this information through tablets or smartphones [ 29 , 30 ]. Surely researchers are exploring the implications of how and when these subjective data are collected, their utility for effective monitoring, and, more relevant from our point of view, whether there is a quality control process for this subjective information and how it works, but results have not reached the publication stage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Web Health Monitoring Survey: A New Approach to Enhance the Effectiveness of Telemedicine Systems

Romano

Sardella²,

Alboni³

2016

JMIR Res Protoc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAging of the European population and interest in a healthy population in western countries have contributed to an increase in the number of health surveys, where the role of survey design, data collection, and data analysis methodology is clear and recognized by the whole scientific community. Survey methodology has had to couple with the challenges deriving from data collection through information and communications technology (ICT). Telemedicine systems have not used patients as a source of information, often limiting them to collecting only biometric data. A more effective telemonitoring system would be able to collect objective and subjective data (biometric parameters and symptoms reported by the patients themselves), and to control the quality of subjective data collected: this goal be achieved only by using and merging competencies from both survey methodology and health research.ObjectiveThe objective of our study was to propose new metrics to control the quality of data, along with the well-known indicators of survey methodology. Web questionnaires administered daily to a group of patients for an extended length of time are a Web health monitoring survey (WHMS) in a telemedicine system.MethodsWe calculated indicators based on paradata collected during a WHMS study involving 12 patients, who signed in to the website daily for 2 months.ResultsThe patients’ involvement was very high: the patients’ response rate ranged between 1.00 and 0.82, with an outlier of 0.65. Item nonresponse rate was very low, ranging between 0.0% and 7.4%. We propose adherence to the chosen time to connect to the website as a measure of involvement and cooperation by the patients: the difference from the median time ranged between 11 and 24 minutes, demonstrating very good cooperation and involvement from all patients. To measure habituation to the questionnaire, we also compared nonresponse rates to the items between the first and the second month of the study, and found no significant difference. We computed the time to complete the questionnaire both as a measure of possible burden for patient, and to detect the risk of automatic responses. Neither of these hypothesis was confirmed, and differences in time to completion seemed to depend on health conditions. Focus groups with patients confirmed their appreciation for this “new” active role in a telemonitoring system.ConclusionsThe main and innovative aspect of our proposal is the use of a Web questionnaire to virtually recreate a checkup visit, integrating subjective (patient’s information) with objective data (biometric information). Our results, although preliminary and if need of further study, appear promising in proposing more effective telemedicine systems. Survey methodology could have an effective role in this growing field of research and applications.

show abstract

“…15 Combining body observation, body analysis and informal caregivers' involvement to support symptom perception Body observation (ie, body listening, symptom monitoring) and body analysis (ie, symptom recognition, interpretation and labelling) are crucial elements to combine to support symptom perception. According to a literature review, 14 seven interventions [33][34][35][36][37][38][39] targeting symptom perception in pilot studies have shown promising results in terms of clinical improvement of HF self-care, 33 34 decreased symptom intensity, 35 number of symptoms 36 and perceived distress 33 as well as better health-related quality of life. 35 36 Another study 40 focusing on symptom perception and symptom response pilot-tested the efficacy of a similar training programme and reported greater absolute change compared with controls for self-care maintenance and confidence.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of This Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

SYMPERHEART: an intervention to support symptom perception in persons with heart failure and their informal caregiver: a feasibility quasi-experimental study protocol

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionSymptom perception in heart failure (HF) has been identified as crucial for effective self-care, and is related to patient and health system outcomes. There is uncertainty regarding the feasibility and acceptability of symptom perception support and doubts regarding how to include informal caregivers. This study aims to test the feasibility, acceptability and outcome responsiveness of an intervention supporting symptom perception in persons with HF and their informal caregiver.Methods and analysisA feasibility study with a quasi-experimental pretest and post-test single group design is conducted. The convenience sample consists of 30 persons with HF, their informal caregivers and six nurses. SYMPERHEART is an evidence-informed intervention that targets symptom perception by educational and support components. Feasibility is measured by time-to-recruit; time-to-deliver; eligibility rate; intervention delivery fidelity rate. Acceptability is measured by rate of consent, retention rate, treatment acceptability and the engagement in the intervention components. Outcome responsiveness includes: HF self-care (via the Self-care of Heart Failure Index V.7.2); perception of HF symptom burden (via the Heart Failure Somatic Perception Scale V.3); health status (via the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12); caregivers’ contribution to HF self-care (via the Caregiver Contribution to Self-Care of Heart Failure Index 2); caregivers’ burden (via the Zarit Burden Interview). Clinical outcomes include HF events, hospitalisation reason and length of hospital stay. Descriptive statistics will be used to report feasibility, acceptability, patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and clinical outcomes. PRO and caregiver-reported outcome responsiveness will be reported with mean absolute change and effect sizes.Ethics and disseminationThe study is conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki. The Human Research Ethics Committee of the Canton of Vaud, Switzerland, has approved the study. Written informed consent from persons with HF and informal caregivers are obtained. Results will be published via peer reviewed and professional journals, and further disseminated via congresses.Trial registration numberISRCTN18151041.

show abstract

A Web Application for Self-Monitoring Improves Symptoms in Chronic Systolic Heart Failure

Cited by 12 publications

References 17 publications

Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care

Functionality and feedback: a realist synthesis of the collation, interpretation and utilisation of patient-reported outcome measures data to improve patient care

Web Health Monitoring Survey: A New Approach to Enhance the Effectiveness of Telemedicine Systems

SYMPERHEART: an intervention to support symptom perception in persons with heart failure and their informal caregiver: a feasibility quasi-experimental study protocol

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About