Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2018
Rural-Urban Comparison of Telehome Monitoring for Patients with Chronic Heart Failure.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jaana Mirou, Sherrard Heather
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Rural geographic isolation may act as a promoting or restraining variable to the diffusion of technology and healthy aging in the community. Telehome monitoring (TM) leverages technology to support seniors living in the community with chronic conditions. To date, limited research has investigated the utilization of TM in rural settings. This study assesses the comparative utilization of TM for patients with heart failure in rural versus urban environments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study involving chart reviews of all patients enrolled in the TM program at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute during 2014. Data were extracted on urban/rural status, demographic characteristics, and process and outcomes of care. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: More rural patients did not have a documented reason for emergency room visits compared to urban patients. There was no significant association between the urban/rural status and the process and outcome measures at the multivariate level. Being followed-up regularly by a family physician and a specialist, as opposed to a specialist or general practitioner only, was associated with significantly longer TM period and a higher number of diuretic adjustments and calls made by nurses.
DISCUSSION: Although more urban patients were older and living alone, their profile did not affect their utilization of TM. The difference in diagnosis between urban and rural patients also did not contribute to such differences. Hence, there is no variation in the process and outcome measures associated with the utilization of TM between urban and rural environments.
CONCLUSIONS: Rural patients may not be perceived as extensive users of resources nor patients who represent challenges in terms of feasibility of TM use.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study involving chart reviews of all patients enrolled in the TM program at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute during 2014. Data were extracted on urban/rural status, demographic characteristics, and process and outcomes of care. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted.
RESULTS: More rural patients did not have a documented reason for emergency room visits compared to urban patients. There was no significant association between the urban/rural status and the process and outcome measures at the multivariate level. Being followed-up regularly by a family physician and a specialist, as opposed to a specialist or general practitioner only, was associated with significantly longer TM period and a higher number of diuretic adjustments and calls made by nurses.
DISCUSSION: Although more urban patients were older and living alone, their profile did not affect their utilization of TM. The difference in diagnosis between urban and rural patients also did not contribute to such differences. Hence, there is no variation in the process and outcome measures associated with the utilization of TM between urban and rural environments.
CONCLUSIONS: Rural patients may not be perceived as extensive users of resources nor patients who represent challenges in terms of feasibility of TM use.