Cargando…
Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: Telemedicine applications aim to address variance in clinical outcomes and increase access to specialist expertise. Despite widespread implementation, there is little robust evidence about cost-effectiveness, clinical benefits, and impact on quality and safety of critical care telemedici...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5070369/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27756376 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0357-7 |
_version_ | 1782461134109933568 |
---|---|
author | Mackintosh, Nicola Terblanche, Marius Maharaj, Ritesh Xyrichis, Andreas Franklin, Karen Keddie, Jamie Larkins, Emily Maslen, Anna Skinner, James Newman, Samuel De Sousa Magalhaes, Joana Hiew Sandall, Jane |
author_facet | Mackintosh, Nicola Terblanche, Marius Maharaj, Ritesh Xyrichis, Andreas Franklin, Karen Keddie, Jamie Larkins, Emily Maslen, Anna Skinner, James Newman, Samuel De Sousa Magalhaes, Joana Hiew Sandall, Jane |
author_sort | Mackintosh, Nicola |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Telemedicine applications aim to address variance in clinical outcomes and increase access to specialist expertise. Despite widespread implementation, there is little robust evidence about cost-effectiveness, clinical benefits, and impact on quality and safety of critical care telemedicine. The primary objective was to determine the impact of critical care telemedicine (with clinical decision support available 24/7) on intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality and length of stay in adults and children. The secondary objectives included staff and patient experience, costs, protocol adherence, and adverse events. METHODS: Data sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library databases, Health Technology Assessment Database, Web of Science, OpenGrey, OpenDOAR, and the HMIC through to December 2015. Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were eligible for inclusion. Eligible studies reported on differences between groups using the telemedicine intervention and standard care. Two review authors screened abstracts and assessed potentially eligible studies using Cochrane guidance. RESULTS: Two controlled before-after studies met the inclusion criteria. Both were assessed as high risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible as we were unable to disaggregate data between the two studies. One study used a non-randomised stepped-wedge design in seven ICUs. Hospital mortality was the primary outcome which showed a reduction from 13.6 % (CI, 11.9–15.4 %) to 11.8 % (CI, 10.9–12.8 %) during the intervention period with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.40 (95 % CI, 0.31–0.52; p = .005). The second study used a non-randomised, unblinded, pre-/post-assessment of telemedicine interventions in 56 adult ICUs. Hospital mortality (primary outcome) reduced from 11 to 10 % (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.84; CI, 0.78–0.89; p = <.001). CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the poor methodological quality of most studies investigating critical care telemedicine. The results of the two included studies showed a reduction in hospital mortality in patients receiving the intervention. Further multi-site randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies with accompanying process evaluations are urgently needed to determine effectiveness, implementation, and associated costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014007406 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0357-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5070369 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-50703692016-10-24 Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review Mackintosh, Nicola Terblanche, Marius Maharaj, Ritesh Xyrichis, Andreas Franklin, Karen Keddie, Jamie Larkins, Emily Maslen, Anna Skinner, James Newman, Samuel De Sousa Magalhaes, Joana Hiew Sandall, Jane Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: Telemedicine applications aim to address variance in clinical outcomes and increase access to specialist expertise. Despite widespread implementation, there is little robust evidence about cost-effectiveness, clinical benefits, and impact on quality and safety of critical care telemedicine. The primary objective was to determine the impact of critical care telemedicine (with clinical decision support available 24/7) on intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital mortality and length of stay in adults and children. The secondary objectives included staff and patient experience, costs, protocol adherence, and adverse events. METHODS: Data sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library databases, Health Technology Assessment Database, Web of Science, OpenGrey, OpenDOAR, and the HMIC through to December 2015. Randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were eligible for inclusion. Eligible studies reported on differences between groups using the telemedicine intervention and standard care. Two review authors screened abstracts and assessed potentially eligible studies using Cochrane guidance. RESULTS: Two controlled before-after studies met the inclusion criteria. Both were assessed as high risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible as we were unable to disaggregate data between the two studies. One study used a non-randomised stepped-wedge design in seven ICUs. Hospital mortality was the primary outcome which showed a reduction from 13.6 % (CI, 11.9–15.4 %) to 11.8 % (CI, 10.9–12.8 %) during the intervention period with an adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 0.40 (95 % CI, 0.31–0.52; p = .005). The second study used a non-randomised, unblinded, pre-/post-assessment of telemedicine interventions in 56 adult ICUs. Hospital mortality (primary outcome) reduced from 11 to 10 % (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.84; CI, 0.78–0.89; p = <.001). CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the poor methodological quality of most studies investigating critical care telemedicine. The results of the two included studies showed a reduction in hospital mortality in patients receiving the intervention. Further multi-site randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies with accompanying process evaluations are urgently needed to determine effectiveness, implementation, and associated costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014007406 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0357-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5070369/ /pubmed/27756376 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0357-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Mackintosh, Nicola Terblanche, Marius Maharaj, Ritesh Xyrichis, Andreas Franklin, Karen Keddie, Jamie Larkins, Emily Maslen, Anna Skinner, James Newman, Samuel De Sousa Magalhaes, Joana Hiew Sandall, Jane Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review |
title | Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review |
title_full | Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review |
title_short | Telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review |
title_sort | telemedicine with clinical decision support for critical care: a systematic review |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5070369/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27756376 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0357-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mackintoshnicola telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT terblanchemarius telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT maharajritesh telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT xyrichisandreas telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT franklinkaren telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT keddiejamie telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT larkinsemily telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT maslenanna telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT skinnerjames telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT newmansamuel telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT desousamagalhaesjoanahiew telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview AT sandalljane telemedicinewithclinicaldecisionsupportforcriticalcareasystematicreview |