eHealth interventions for people with chronic kidney disease

Stevenson, Jessica; Campbell, Zoé; Webster, Angela C; Chow, Clara K; Tong, Allison; Craig, Jonathan C.; Campbell, Katrina L.; Lee, Vincent

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012379.pub2

Cited by 65 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 110 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…With the rapid growth and momentum of eHealth, one of the most pressing concerns is that its efficacy in kidney care remains unclear. A 2019 Cochrane review concluded that overall, the evidence for eHealth interventions is of low quality and insufficient to guide clinical practice in kidney disease 6 . Moreover, a randomized trial that included 601 patients with CKD found that an eHealth intervention that used home monitoring devices to obtain biometric data (for example, blood pressure and weight) and deliver multidisciplinary care did not reduce mortality, hospitalization rates, emergency department visits or nursing home admissions when compared with usual care 4 .…”

Section: Efficacy Of Ehealth Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On average, participants took 14.9 blood pressure measurements per month and used the educational modules on 5.8 days per month 4 . Multiple other studies have reported high participant satisfaction with kidney eHealth interventions for a variety of reasons, including ease of use, low burden and increased frequency and quality of interactions with health-care staff 6 .…”

Section: Efficacy Of Ehealth Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

eHealth in kidney care

Wang

2020

Nat Rev Nephrol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Efficacy Of Ehealth Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Efficacy Of Ehealth Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

eHealth in kidney care

Wang

2020

Nat Rev Nephrol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…eHealth refers to 'health services and information delivered or enhanced through the internet and related technologies', 14 which includes internet and computer, mobile phone (the use of text messaging and applications on mobile phones), telehealth, electronic monitors and wireless and Bluetooth enabled devices. 15 eHealth interventions have become increasingly popular due to making treatments more accessible and affordable. 16 17 They provide benefits for patients with an inconvenient location or commute and unavailable or inflexible times, and patients may receive the required information in a cost-effective way.…”

Section: Open Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of electronic health interventions on metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chen

Tang

et al. 2020

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveWe aimed to examine whether eHealth interventions can effectively improve anthropometric and biochemical indicators of patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, the Web of Science, Embase, Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Wanfang and Weipu databases were comprehensively searched for papers that were published from database inception to May 2019. Articles were included if the participants were metabolic syndrome (MetS) patients, the participants received eHealth interventions, the participants in the control group received usual care or were wait listed, the outcomes included anthropometric and biochemical indicators of MetS, and the study was a randomised controlled trial (RCT) or a controlled clinical trial (CCT). The Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies was used to assess the methodological quality of the included articles. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager V.5.3 software.ResultsIn our review, seven RCTs and two CCTs comprising 935 MetS participants met the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that eHealth interventions resulted in significant improvements in body mass index (standardised mean difference (SMD)=−0.36, 95% CI (−0.61 to −0.10), p<0.01), waist circumference (SMD=−0.47, 95% CI (−0.84 to −0.09), p=0.01) and systolic blood pressure(SMD=−0.35, 95% CI (−0.66 to −0.04), p=0.03) compared with the respective outcomes associated with the usual care or wait-listed groups. Based on the included studies, we found significant effects of the eHealth interventions on body weight. However, we did not find significant positive effects of the eHealth interventions on other metabolic parameters.ConclusionsThe results indicated that eHealth interventions were beneficial for improving specific anthropometric outcomes, but did not affect biochemical indicators of MetS. Therefore, whether researchers adopt eHealth interventions should be based on the purpose of the study. More rigorous studies are needed to confirm these findings.

show abstract

“…There are examples of eHealth in musculoskeletal physiotherapy and medical specialties, such as ophthalmology, dermatology, radiology, urology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and orthopaedics. [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14] Sport and exercise medicine (SEM) physicians can learn from these but should also develop and implement their own guiding principles.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Remote assessment in sport and exercise medicine (SEM): a narrative review and teleSEM solutions for and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic forces sport and exercise medicine (SEM) physicians to think differently about the clinical care of patients. Many rapidly implement eHealth and telemedicine solutions specific to SEM without guidance on how best to provide these services.AimThe aim of this paper is to present some guiding principles on how to plan for and perform an SEM consultation remotely (teleSEM) based on a narrative review of the literature. A secondary aim is to develop a generic teleSEM injury template.ResultseHealth and telemedicine are essential solutions to effective remote patient care, also in SEM. This paper provides guidance for wise planning and delivery of teleSEM. It is crucial for SEM physicians, technology providers and organisations to codesign teleSEM services, ideally involving athletes, coaches and other clinicians involved in the clinical care of athletes, and to gradually implement these services with appropriate support and education.ConclusionteleSEM provides solutions for remote athlete clinical care during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. We define two new terms—eSEM and teleSEM and discuss guiding principles on how to plan for and perform SEM consultations remotely (teleSEM). We provide an example of a generic teleSEM injury assessment guide.

show abstract

eHealth interventions for people with chronic kidney disease

Abstract: 8. Art. No.: CD012379. Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to comments and criticisms, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews should be consulted for the most recent version of the Review.

Cited by 65 publications

References 110 publications

eHealth in kidney care

eHealth in kidney care

Effect of electronic health interventions on metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Remote assessment in sport and exercise medicine (SEM): a narrative review and teleSEM solutions for and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About