Abstract
BackgroundTelemonitoring can improve heart failure (HF) management, but there is no standardized evaluation framework to comprehensively evaluate its impact.ObjectiveOur objectives were to list the criteria used in published evaluations of noninvasive HF telemonitoring projects, describe how they are used in the evaluation studies, and organize them into a consistent scheme.MethodsArticles published from January 1990 to August 2015 were obtained through MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Articles were eligible if they were original reports of a noninvasive HF telemonitoring evaluation study in the English language. Studies of implantable telemonitoring devices were excluded. Each selected article was screened to extract the description of the telemonitoring project and the evaluation process and criteria. A qualitative synthesis was performed.ResultsWe identified and reviewed 128 articles leading to 52 evaluation criteria classified into 6 dimensions: clinical, economic, user perspective, educational, organizational, and technical. The clinical and economic impacts were evaluated in more than 70% of studies, whereas the educational, organizational, and technical impacts were studied in fewer than 15%. User perspective was the most frequently covered dimension in the development phase of telemonitoring projects, whereas clinical and economic impacts were the focus of later phases.ConclusionsTelemonitoring evaluation frameworks should cover all 6 dimensions appropriately distributed along the telemonitoring project lifecycle. Our next goal is to build such a comprehensive evaluation framework for telemonitoring and test it on an ongoing noninvasive HF telemonitoring project.
Highlights
Heart failure (HF) affects 26 million people worldwide, incurring direct and indirect costs of more than US $100 billion per year [1,2]
Telemonitoring evaluation frameworks should cover all 6 dimensions appropriately distributed along the telemonitoring project lifecycle
As a result of these differences, noninvasive heart failure (HF) telemonitoring requires readiness for change, education, and training of patients and caregivers whereas invasive HF telemonitoring does not [8]. Due to these major differences, this review focuses on noninvasive HF telemonitoring
Summary
Heart failure (HF) affects 26 million people worldwide, incurring direct and indirect costs of more than US $100 billion per year [1,2]. Telemonitoring is a branch of telemedicine defined as the use of communication technologies to monitor and transmit data on the health status of patients to distant care providers [5,6]. It differs from teleconsultation, where there is a real-time interactive video or audio consultation between the patient and a distant health care provider. Telemonitoring can improve heart failure (HF) management, but there is no standardized evaluation framework to comprehensively evaluate its impact
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
