4.6 Article

Home telemonitoring of non-invasive ventilation decreases healthcare utilisation in a prospective controlled trial of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

期刊

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2010.206680

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia [PIC/IC/82765/2007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is an efficient method for treating respiratory failure in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). However, it requires a process of adaptation not always achieved due to poor compliance. The role of telemonitoring of NIV is not yet established. Objectives To test the advantage of using modem communication in NIV of ALS patients. Design Prospective, single blinded controlled trial. Population and methods According to their residence, 40 consecutive ventilated ALS patients were assigned to one of two groups: a control group (G1, n=20) in which compliance and ventilator parameter settings were assessed during office visits; or an intervention group (G2, n=20) in which patients received a modem device connected to the ventilator. The number of office and emergency room visits and hospital admissions during the entire span of NIV use and the number of parameter setting changes to achieve full compliance were the primary outcome measurements. Results Demographic and clinical features were similar between the two groups at admission. No difference in compliance was found between the groups. The incidence of changes in parameter settings throughout the survival period with NIV was lower in G2 (p<0.0001) but it was increased during the initial period needed to achieve full compliance. The number of office or emergency room visits and inhospital admissions was significantly lower in G2 (p<0.0001). Survival showed a trend favouring G2 (p=0.13). Conclusions This study shows that telemonitoring reduces health care utilisation with probable favourable implications on costs, survival and functional status.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据