Telemonitoring programme on COVID-19 for a low-income community in Brazil: case study

Graça, Tamiris Uracs de Sales; Santos, Alice Lopes; Yamamoto, Guilherme Lopes; Souza, Rodrigo Wilson de; Srougé, Marcella Pedroso Peternelli; Pacheco, Rafael Leite; Lima, Carlos Victor Chaves de; Riera, Rachel

doi:10.1136/bmjinnov-2020-000619

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The wide variety of free software and platforms currently available, such as Zoom, WeChat, WhatsApp, Google Duo, WebEx, FaceTime, Redcap platform, Doxy.me platform, emails and also new software were introduced like e-CoVig, Microsoft Teams and TELEA tool; adequate lighting; good camera quality; and a good internet connection allow for the proper evaluation of patients. 40 , 41 , 44 , 48 , 53 , 54 , 57 , 71 , 73 – 75 , 79 , 84 In current studies, Zoom was the most frequent application used mostly for Video-conference and virtual visits. 36 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 54 , 53 , 57 , 71 , 73 , 77 , 79 , 84…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Telemedicine technologies and applications in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

Mehraeen

SeyedAlinaghi

Heydari

et al. 2023

Health Informatics J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Telemedicine services saw substantial surges in their use during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the lockdowns and characteristics of the pandemic. Therefore, the authors aimed to systematically review the telemedicine services provided during the COVID-19 pandemic and their potential applications. Methods The authors searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases on September 14, 2021. Then, the retrieved records underwent two-step title/abstract and full-text screening processes, and the eligible articles were included for qualitative synthesis. Results The review of studies demonstrated that the telephone is listed 38 times, making it the most common technology used in telemedicine. Video conferencing is also mentioned in 29 articles, as well as other technologies: Mobile-health ( n = 15), Virtual reality ( n = 7). According to the findings of the present study, Tele-follow-up ( n = 24), Tele-consulting ( n = 20), Virtual visits (20), and Tele-monitoring ( n = 18) were the most widely used telemedicine applications. Conclusion Telemedicine has been an effective approach to COVID-19 management. Telemedicine technology is going to play a key role in the future of health medicine, patient consultation, and many other extended applications of health care in remote rural locations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…It helps pharmacies, customers, and prescribing physicians by delivering healthcare services more quickly. 46 , 48 , 66 With an e-prescription feature, physicians can convey prescriptions with minor errors. It would help to save time while also improving linkage and customer satisfaction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Telemedicine technologies and applications in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

Mehraeen

SeyedAlinaghi

Heydari

et al. 2023

Health Informatics J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Remote Patient Monitoring at Home in Patients With COVID-19: Narrative Review

Cornelis,

Christiaens,

de Meester

et al. 2024

JMIR Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background During the pandemic, health care providers implemented remote patient monitoring (RPM) for patients experiencing COVID-19. RPM is an interaction between health care professionals and patients who are in different locations, in which certain patient functioning parameters are assessed and followed up for a certain duration of time. The implementation of RPM in these patients aimed to reduce the strain on hospitals and primary care. Objective With this literature review, we aim to describe the characteristics of RPM interventions, report on patients with COVID-19 receiving RPM, and provide an overview of outcome variables such as length of stay (LOS), hospital readmission, and mortality. Methods A combination of different searches in several database types (traditional databases, trial registers, daily [Google] searches, and daily PubMed alerts) was run daily from March 2020 to December 2021. A search update for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed in April 2022. Results The initial search yielded more than 4448 articles (not including daily searches). After deduplication and assessment for eligibility, 241 articles were retained describing 164 telemonitoring studies from 160 centers. None of the 164 studies covering 248,431 patients reported on the presence of a randomized control group. Studies described a “prehosp” group (96 studies) with patients who had a suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis and who were not hospitalized but closely monitored at home or a “posthosp” group (32 studies) with patients who were monitored at home after hospitalization for COVID-19. Moreover, 34 studies described both groups, and in 2 studies, the description was unclear. In the prehosp and posthosp groups, there were large variations in the number of emergency department (ED) visits (0%-36% and 0%-16%, respectively) and no convincing evidence that RPM leads to less or more ED visits or hospital readmissions (0%-30% and 0%-22%, respectively). Mortality was generally low, and there was weak to no evidence that RPM is associated with lower mortality. Moreover, there was no evidence that RPM shortens previous LOS. A literature update identified 3 small-scale RCTs, which could not demonstrate statistically significant differences in these outcomes. Most papers claimed savings; however, the scientific base for these claims was doubtful. The overall patient experiences with RPM were positive, as patients felt more reassured, although many patients declined RPM for several reasons (eg, technological embarrassment, digital literacy). Conclusions Based on these results, there is no convincing evidence that RPM in COVID-19 patients avoids ED visits or hospital readmissions and shortens LOS or reduces mortality. On the other hand, there is no evidence that RPM has adverse outcomes. Further research should focus on developing, implementing, and evaluating an RPM framework.

show abstract

Remote Patient Monitoring at Home in Patients With COVID-19: Narrative Review (Preprint)

Cornelis¹,

Christiaens²,

Meester³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND During the COVID-19 pandemic healthcare providers boosted their care capacity by implementing remote patient monitoring (RPM). This way they wanted to reduce the strain on hospital capacity as well as relieve primary care and emergency departments. OBJECTIVE With this literature review we aim at describing which RPM interventions were used for COVID-19 patients, reporting on the characteristics of the patients with COVID-19 included in RPM, and providing an overview of the effects of RPM on outcome variables such as length of stay, hospital (re)admissions, and mortality. METHODS A combination of different searches in several database types (traditional databases, trial registers, daily (google) searches and daily Pubmed alerts) were run from March 2020 till December 2021. A search update for randomized clinical trials was done in April 2022. RESULTS The initial search yielded more than 4 448 articles (not including daily searches). After deduplication and assessment for eligibility, 241 articles were retained describing 164 telemonitoring projects from 160 centres. None of the 164 studies covering 248 431 included patients reported on the presence of a randomized control group. There is a large variety in number of emergency department (ED) visits and no convincing evidence that RPM leads to less or more ED-visits as well as hospital (re)admissions. Mortality was generally low, and there is weak to no evidence that RPM is associated with lower mortality. There is neither evidence that RPM shortens previous hospital length of stay. Most papers claim savings, however the scientific base for these claims is doubtful. The overall patient experiences with RPM were positive, as patients felt more reassured. However, the overall positive picture might be skewed because many patients declined RPM for several reasons (e.g. technological embarrassment, feeling too good, etc.). A literature update detected three small scale randomized controlled trials (RCT’s) which could not demonstrate statistically significant differences in these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS There is up till now no convincing evidence that COVID-19 RPM patients is effective in avoiding ED-visits, hospital (re)admissions, shortening length of hospital stay or reducing mortality, but there is also no signal RPM has reverse unexpected outcomes. Further research should focus on developing, implementing, and evaluating an RPM framework.

show abstract

Telemonitoring programme on COVID-19 for a low-income community in Brazil: case study

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

Telemedicine technologies and applications in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

Telemedicine technologies and applications in the era of COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review

Remote Patient Monitoring at Home in Patients With COVID-19: Narrative Review

Remote Patient Monitoring at Home in Patients With COVID-19: Narrative Review (Preprint)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About