4.5 Review

Non-invasive home telemonitoring in patients with decompensated heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

ESC HEART FAILURE
卷 8, 期 5, 页码 3696-3708

出版社

WILEY PERIODICALS, INC
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.13475

关键词

Heart failure; Telemedicine; Telemonitoring; Telerehabilitation; Remote consultation; Mortality; Hospitalization; Quality of life

资金

  1. Viipurin tuberkuloosisaatio
  2. Finnish State Research Funding (VTR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review and meta-analysis found that non-invasive home telemonitoring did not significantly reduce all-cause hospitalizations and mortality in patients with recently decompensated heart failure. However, interventions that directly altered heart failure medication showed significant effects on reducing all-cause hospitalizations.
We planned this systematic review and meta-analysis to study an estimate of the effect of non-invasive home telemonitoring (TM) in the treatment of patients with recently decompensated heart failure (HF). A systematic literature search was conducted in the Medline, Cinahl, and Scopus databases to look for randomized controlled studies comparing TM with standard care in the treatment of patients with recently decompensated HF. The main outcomes of interest were all-cause hospitalizations and mortality. Eleven original articles met our eligibility criteria. The pooled estimate of the relative risk of all-cause hospitalization in the TM group compared with standard care was 0.95 (95% CI 0.84-1.08, P = 0.43) and the relative risk of all-cause death was 0.83 (95% CI 0.63-1.09, P = 0.17). There was significant clinical heterogeneity among primary studies. HF medication could be directly altered in three study interventions, and two of these had a statistically significant effect on all-cause hospitalizations. The pooled effect estimate of TM interventions on all-cause hospitalizations and all-cause death in patients with recently decompensated heart failure was neutral.

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

4.5
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