Key result
Remote monitoring for patients with decompensated heart failure improved quality of life at 6 months compared to standard care (MSQ score difference 10.4 points; P=0.0001).
Why the study?
The study was conducted to analyze the results of remote monitoring of patients with decompensated heart failure on quality of life, self-care ability, and treatment adherence 3 and 6 months post-discharge.
Does remote monitoring improve quality of life, self-care ability, and adherence to treatment in patients with decompensated heart failure after hospital discharge?
Does remote monitoring improve quality of life, self-care ability, and adherence to treatment in patients with decompensated heart failure after hospital discharge?
Mean Difference: 10.4
p-value: p=0.0001
A remote monitoring model for heart failure patients post-discharge significantly improves quality of life, treatment adherence, and self-care ability compared to standard care.
Remote monitoring may improve post-discharge QOL and adherence in HF; leaves open confirmation in randomized trials.
Aim. To analyze the results of remote monitoring of patients with decompensated heart failure (HF) based on the assessment of quality of life (QOL), self-care ability and adherence to treatment 3 and 6 months after discharge from the hospital. Material and methods . The first group (experimental) consisted of 70 patients who, along with the approved healthcare standard, underwent measures according to the developed model for managing HF patients, including remote monitoring. The second group (control) included 65 patients who received care according to generally accepted algorithms for managing HF patients. In the study group, there were 46% men (69,6±9,4 years) and 54% women (71,7±9,9 years). The control group also included 46% men (70,6±9,1 years) and 54% women (73,0±10,3 years). Class I HF in the first group had 4%, while in the second — 3%; class II HF in both groups occurred in 11%; class III in the first group — 43%, in the second group — 54%, class IV HF in the first group — 41%, in the second group — 32% of patients. We conducted a standard clinical examination, assessed QOL, self-care ability, and adherence to treatment. Results. In the first group, after 3 months, compared with the baseline, the average Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) score was lower by 37 (p=0,037), while after 6 months — by 33,6 (p=0,026). After 3 months according to the MSQ, the QOL in the second group was higher by 7,9 points (p=0,0001); according to the Morisky-Green test — lower by 1,2 points (p=0,0003); according to the self-care questionnaire — higher by 4,7 points (p=0,0001) than in the first group. After 6 months, MSQ score in the second group was higher by 10,4 points (p=0,0001), according to the Morisky-Green test — lower by 1,8 points (p=0,0003); according to the self-care questionnaire — higher by 5,6 points (p=0,0001) than in the study group. Conclusion. The developed model for managing HF patients using remote monitoring, in comparison with the generally accepted standards, has led to an increase in QOL, adherence to treatment and self-care ability of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Пырикова et al. (2022) studied Decompensated heart failure (n=135). Remote monitoring vs. Standard care (generally accepted algorithms) was evaluated on Quality of life (MSQ score) at 6 months (MD 10.4 points, p=0.0001). Remote monitoring for patients with decompensated heart failure improved quality of life at 6 months compared to standard care (MSQ score difference 10.4 points; P=0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: