Cargando…
Remote Patient Monitoring via Non-Invasive Digital Technologies: A Systematic Review
Background: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify key trends associated with remote patient monitoring (RPM) via noninvasive digital technologies over the last decade. Materials and Methods: A search was conducted in EMBASE and Ovid MEDLINE. Citations were screened for relevance ag...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5240011/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27116181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2016.0051 |
Sumario: | Background: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify key trends associated with remote patient monitoring (RPM) via noninvasive digital technologies over the last decade. Materials and Methods: A search was conducted in EMBASE and Ovid MEDLINE. Citations were screened for relevance against predefined selection criteria based on the PICOTS (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Timeframe, and Study Design) format. We included studies published between January 1, 2005 and September 15, 2015 that used RPM via noninvasive digital technology (smartphones/personal digital assistants [PDAs], wearables, biosensors, computerized systems, or multiple components of the formerly mentioned) in evaluating health outcomes compared to standard of care or another technology. Studies were quality appraised according to Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Results: Of 347 articles identified, 62 met the selection criteria. Most studies were randomized control trials with older adult populations, small sample sizes, and limited follow-up. There was a trend toward multicomponent interventions (n = 26), followed by smartphones/PDAs (n = 12), wearables (n = 11), biosensor devices (n = 7), and computerized systems (n = 6). Another key trend was the monitoring of chronic conditions, including respiratory (23%), weight management (17%), metabolic (18%), and cardiovascular diseases (16%). Although substantial diversity in health-related outcomes was noted, studies predominantly reported positive findings. Conclusions: This review will help decision makers develop a better understanding of the current landscape of peer-reviewed literature, demonstrating the utility of noninvasive RPM in various patient populations. Future research is needed to determine the effectiveness of RPM via noninvasive digital technologies in delivering patient healthcare benefits and the feasibility of large-scale implementation. |
---|