Abstract
Background Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has been evaluated in COPD but with varying results. We aimed to evaluate whether a tablet system that monitors disease related parameters in patients with COPD could influence physical and mental health related quality of life compared to usual care (UC).
Methods Seventy patients with GOLD E COPD (61% women, age 71±8 years, FEV1 41±13% pred., CAT 19±7 points) were included at the COPD center in Gothenburg, Sweden and randomised to a tablet-based RPM system or usual care for a 26-week period, after which they crossed over to the alternative management for another 26 weeks. SF-12 (primary outcome), CAT, mMRC, EQ5D, HADS were evaluated at four visits. Exacerbations were continuously reported as well as adherence to RPM.
Results Fifty-nine patients completed the study, 28 patients randomised to start with UC and 31 patients with RPM. The change in SF-12 physical (PCS) (UC: −1.17±6.90 versus RPM: −1.06±8.15) and mental component summary (MCS) (UC: 0.63±11.14 versus RPM: −0.63±8.15) as well as in CAT, mMRC, EQ5D, HADS anxiety, HADS depression and number of exacerbations was similar in both intervention periods. Neither the 26-weeks UC period or the intervention significantly impacted on the measured outcomes. There was a 95% adherence rate during RPM.
Conclusions A 26-week tablet-based RPM system that monitors CAT, oxygen saturation, blood pressure, pulse, weight and physical activity, connected to a case manager is feasible and safe but did not influence health-related quality of life in patients with COPD GOLD D.
Footnotes
This manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the ERJ Open Research. It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJOR online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article.
Conflict of interest: M. Frerichs has nothing to disclose.
Conflict of interest: MH. Li has nothing to disclose.
Conflict of interest: MA. Andersson reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, manuscript writing, or educational events from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, and TEVA for lectures in pulmonary medicine and for the production of educational materials in pulmonary medicine outside the submitted work.
Conflict of interest: MK. Andelid has nothing to disclose.
Conflict of interest: MM. Crona has nothing to disclose.
Conflict of interest: ML. E. G. W. Vanfleteren reports support for the present study from the Västra-Götaland region in Sweden related to healthcare transformation and digitalisation (Budget för 2018 års genomförande av omställningen av hälso- och sjukvården. Diarienummer HS 2018-00460) and from the Swedish government and country council ALF grant (ALFGBG-824371), grants from the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, Kamprad Stiftelse, and AstraZeneca, payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, manuscript writing or educational events from AstraZeneca, GSK, Chiesi, Pulmonx, Grifols, and Novartis, support for attending meetings from Menarin Foundation, and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with AstraZeneca.
This is a PDF-only article. Please click on the PDF link above to read it.
- Received May 24, 2024.
- Accepted August 8, 2024.
- Copyright ©The authors 2024
This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions{at}ersnet.org
