Cargando…
Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial
IMPORTANCE: Healthcare concepts for chronic diseases based on tele-monitoring have become increasingly important during COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of a novel integrated care concept (NICC) that combines tele-monitoring with the support of a call centre in addition to gu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9832250/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36631889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-023-00991-1 |
_version_ | 1784868018852986880 |
---|---|
author | Öner, Alper Dittrich, Hermann Arslan, Fatih Hintz, Sissy Ortak, Jasmin Brandewiede, Bernard Mann, Miriam Krockenberger, Katja Thiéry, Alexandre Ziegler, Andreas Schmidt, Christian |
author_facet | Öner, Alper Dittrich, Hermann Arslan, Fatih Hintz, Sissy Ortak, Jasmin Brandewiede, Bernard Mann, Miriam Krockenberger, Katja Thiéry, Alexandre Ziegler, Andreas Schmidt, Christian |
author_sort | Öner, Alper |
collection | PubMed |
description | IMPORTANCE: Healthcare concepts for chronic diseases based on tele-monitoring have become increasingly important during COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of a novel integrated care concept (NICC) that combines tele-monitoring with the support of a call centre in addition to guideline therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension. DESIGN: A prospective, parallel-group, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Between December 2017 and August 2019 at the Rostock University Medical Center (Germany). PARTICIPANTS: Including 960 patients with either atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to either NICC (n = 478) or standard-of-care (SoC) (n = 482) in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the NICC group received a combination of tele-monitoring and intensive follow-up and care through a call centre. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Three primary endpoints were formulated: (1) composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction; (2) number of inpatient days; (3) the first plus cardiac decompensation, all measured at 12-months follow-up. Superiority was evaluated using a hierarchical multiple testing strategy for the 3 primary endpoints, where the first step is to test the second primary endpoint (hospitalization) at two-sided 5%-significance level. In case of a non-significant difference between the groups for the rate of hospitalization, the superiority of NICC over SoC is not shown. RESULTS: The first primary endpoint occurred in 1.5% of NICC and 5.2% of SoC patients (OR: 3.3 [95%CI 1.4–8.3], p = 0.009). The number of inpatient treatment days did not differ significantly between both groups (p = 0.122). The third primary endpoint occurred in 3.6% of NICC and 8.1% of SoC patients (OR: 2.2 [95%CI 1.2–4.2], p = 0.016). Four patients died of all-cause death in the NICC and 23 in the SoC groups (OR: 4.4 [95%CI 1.6–12.6], p = 0.006). Based on the prespecified hierarchical statistical analysis protocol for multiple testing, the trial did not meet its primary outcome measure. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension, the NICC approach was not superior over SoC, despite a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction and cardiac decompensation. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03317951. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9832250 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98322502023-01-11 Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial Öner, Alper Dittrich, Hermann Arslan, Fatih Hintz, Sissy Ortak, Jasmin Brandewiede, Bernard Mann, Miriam Krockenberger, Katja Thiéry, Alexandre Ziegler, Andreas Schmidt, Christian Eur J Med Res Research IMPORTANCE: Healthcare concepts for chronic diseases based on tele-monitoring have become increasingly important during COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of a novel integrated care concept (NICC) that combines tele-monitoring with the support of a call centre in addition to guideline therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension. DESIGN: A prospective, parallel-group, open-label, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Between December 2017 and August 2019 at the Rostock University Medical Center (Germany). PARTICIPANTS: Including 960 patients with either atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to either NICC (n = 478) or standard-of-care (SoC) (n = 482) in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the NICC group received a combination of tele-monitoring and intensive follow-up and care through a call centre. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Three primary endpoints were formulated: (1) composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction; (2) number of inpatient days; (3) the first plus cardiac decompensation, all measured at 12-months follow-up. Superiority was evaluated using a hierarchical multiple testing strategy for the 3 primary endpoints, where the first step is to test the second primary endpoint (hospitalization) at two-sided 5%-significance level. In case of a non-significant difference between the groups for the rate of hospitalization, the superiority of NICC over SoC is not shown. RESULTS: The first primary endpoint occurred in 1.5% of NICC and 5.2% of SoC patients (OR: 3.3 [95%CI 1.4–8.3], p = 0.009). The number of inpatient treatment days did not differ significantly between both groups (p = 0.122). The third primary endpoint occurred in 3.6% of NICC and 8.1% of SoC patients (OR: 2.2 [95%CI 1.2–4.2], p = 0.016). Four patients died of all-cause death in the NICC and 23 in the SoC groups (OR: 4.4 [95%CI 1.6–12.6], p = 0.006). Based on the prespecified hierarchical statistical analysis protocol for multiple testing, the trial did not meet its primary outcome measure. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension, the NICC approach was not superior over SoC, despite a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction and cardiac decompensation. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03317951. BioMed Central 2023-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9832250/ /pubmed/36631889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-023-00991-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Öner, Alper Dittrich, Hermann Arslan, Fatih Hintz, Sissy Ortak, Jasmin Brandewiede, Bernard Mann, Miriam Krockenberger, Katja Thiéry, Alexandre Ziegler, Andreas Schmidt, Christian Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial |
title | Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial |
title_full | Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial |
title_fullStr | Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial |
title_short | Comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial |
title_sort | comparison of telemonitoring combined with intensive patient support with standard care in patients with chronic cardiovascular disease - a randomized clinical trial |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9832250/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36631889 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-023-00991-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT oneralper comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT dittrichhermann comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT arslanfatih comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT hintzsissy comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT ortakjasmin comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT brandewiedebernard comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT mannmiriam comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT krockenbergerkatja comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT thieryalexandre comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT zieglerandreas comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT schmidtchristian comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial AT comparisonoftelemonitoringcombinedwithintensivepatientsupportwithstandardcareinpatientswithchroniccardiovasculardiseasearandomizedclinicaltrial |