Key result
Tailored telemonitoring did not significantly reduce heart failure hospitalizations compared with usual care over 1 year (9.1% vs 13.5%; HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.35-1.17; P=0.151).
Why the study?
Does tailored telemonitoring reduce heart failure hospitalizations in patients with heart failure?
RCT (n=382)
randomized
Yes
Does tailored telemonitoring reduce heart failure hospitalizations in patients with heart failure?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Tailored telemonitoring did not significantly reduce heart failure hospitalizations at 1 year, likely due to underpowering, but it did reduce face-to-face nurse contacts.
AIMS: Recent increases in heart failure tend to overload the healthcare system. Consequently, there is a need for innovative strategies to reduce heart failure hospitalizations. METHODS AND RESULTS: A multicentre randomized controlled trial was carried out to test the hypothesis that telemonitoring reduces heart failure hospitalizations during 1 year follow-up. The mean age of the 382 participating patients was 71.5 (32-93) years; the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.38, and in 61% it was ≤0.45%. Mean time to first heart failure-related hospitalization was 161 days for the intervention group and 139 days for the usual-care group; hospitalizations occurred in 18 (9.1%) compared with 25 (13.5%) patients, with a total number of 24 and 43 hospitalizations, respectively [Kaplan-Meier P = 0.151, hazard ratio (HR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-1.17]. Subgroup analysis of the primary endpoint showed benefits for three subgroups: duration of heart failure, having a pacemaker, and co-habiting. The combined endpoint of heart failure admission and all-cause mortality was similar for both groups (Kaplan-Meier P = 0.641, HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69-1.83). No differences were found regarding secondary endpoints, except for the reduced number of face to face contacts with the heart failure nurse (Mann-Whitney P < 0.001). Mortality was 18 (9.1%) in the intervention group and 12 (6.5%) in the usual-care group (Mann-Whitney P = 0.34, Cox regression analysis P = 0.82). CONCLUSION: No significant differences were found regarding the primary endpoint, possibly caused by a relative underpowering of the population combined with well-treated study groups. However, telemonitoring tends to reduce heart failure (re)admissions and significantly decreases contacts with specialized nurses. Further research with pre-specified groups, as found in the subgroup analysis, is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00502255.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Boyne et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (n=382). Tailored telemonitoring vs. Usual care was evaluated on Heart failure hospitalizations (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.35-1.17, p=0.151). Tailored telemonitoring did not significantly reduce heart failure hospitalizations compared with usual care over 1 year (9.1% vs 13.5%; HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.35-1.17; P=0.151).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: