Key result
Remote management cuts hospitalization rates by ~50% compared to traditional care.
Why the study?
To evaluate the effectiveness of remote management based on an Internet Hospital and Family-Sicked Bed strategy under the Four-Party Linkage model in maintenance peritoneal dialysis patients.
Does remote management or Family-Sicked Bed management improve clinical outcomes and reduce costs in maintenance peritoneal dialysis patients compared to traditional outpatient management?
Cohort (n=150)
Open-label
Random number table method
No
Does remote management or Family-Sicked Bed management improve clinical outcomes and reduce costs in maintenance peritoneal dialysis patients compared to traditional outpatient management?
Remote and home-based management models for peritoneal dialysis patients improve clinical outcomes and reduce economic and time burdens compared to traditional outpatient care.
May support remote models in peritoneal dialysis; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the remote management based on the Internet Hospital and Family-Sicked Bed strategy under the Four-Party Linkage model among patients with maintenance peritoneal dialysis (PD). METHODS: Bao'an People's Hospital (Group) utilized its internet hospital platform to conduct a retrospective cohort observational study on the Remote Management (RM) of PD patients. The study further establisheda four-party collaborative disease management model comprising "residents-communities-community health centers-the hospital". A total of 150 insured patients were randomly assigned into three groups-Non-RM-PD group, RM-PD group, and Family-Sicked Bed group-using the random number table method. After a six-month intervention period, clinical indicators across the groups were compared, and analyses were conducted on time consumption, economic costs, as well as the potential benefits for patients, healthcare providers, and society in each group. RESULTS: The clinical outcomes, including hospitalization rates, blood pressure levels, the proportion of patients requiring antihypertensive medications, the number of antihypertensive agents used, fluid overload, edema, hypokalemia, peritonitis incidence, and the rate of Kt/V meet the standard, demonstrated that RM-PD group and Family-Sicked Bed group were superior to the Non RM-PD group(P < 0.05). Multidimensional improvements were observed in the RM-PD and Family-Sickbed groups, such as enhanced quality of home-based PD, improved work efficiency of healthcare staff, greater social benefits, and reduced economic burden on patients. The Non RM-PD group had the highest total annual medical costs after reimbursement, whereas the Family-Sicked Bed group had the lowest (mean ± SD)(Non RM-PD = 39,383 ± 2678, RM-PD = 34,369 ± 2898, Family-Sicked Bed = 25,250 ± 2763, based on Chinese Yuan CNY, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the 6-month follow-up period of this study, remote management supported by the internet hospital and Family-Sicked Bed management under the Four-Party Linkage model have demonstrated effectiveness in PD patients; their long-term sustainability requires further verification with extended follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fu et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Maintenance peritoneal dialysis (n=150). Remote management (RM-PD) and Family-Sicked Bed management vs. Traditional non-remote management (monthly outpatient visits) was evaluated on Hospitalization rate (p=0.025). Remote management and Family-Sicked Bed models reduced hospitalization rates to 8% and 6%, respectively, compared to 16% with traditional care, and significantly lowered annual medical costs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: