4.6 Review

Effectiveness of Telemonitoring for Respiratory and Systemic Symptoms of Asthma and COPD: A Narrative Review

Journal

LIFE-BASEL
Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/life11111215

Keywords

telemonitoring; telehealth; telemedicine; asthma; COPD; respiratory symptoms; monitoring; eHealth; disease management

Funding

  1. University of Groningen
  2. University Medical Center Groningen
  3. Medical Center, Leiden University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A narrative review of recent evidence showed that telemonitoring interventions for asthma and COPD are more effective when they include an educational component on different aspects of self-management, leading to improved disease management for patients.
Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD) are highly prevalent chronic lung diseases that require ongoing self-management, which itself is often suboptimal. Therefore, telemonitoring has been used to help patients measure their symptoms, share data with healthcare providers and receive education and feedback to improve disease management. In this study, we conducted a narrative review of recent evidence on the effectiveness of telemonitoring for asthma and COPD in adults. Of the thirteen identified studies, eleven focused on COPD and two focused on asthma. All studies were reviewed, and effects were compared between intervention and care as usual groups. Of the study interventions, seven showed a positive outcome on at least one outcome measure, and six had no significant results on any of the outcome measures. All of the interventions with a positive outcome included an educational component, while only one of the six interventions without positive outcomes included an educational component. We conclude that telemonitoring interventions for asthma and COPD seem more effective if they included an educational component regarding different aspects of self-management.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available