Skip to main content

Table 2 Results of the meta-analyses in relation to hospitalisation for technology enabled self-monitoring

From: The impact of self-monitoring in chronic illness on healthcare utilisation: a systematic review of reviews

Study Condition Comparisons Results
McLean, 2011 COPD Telehealthcare versus control All-cause hospitalisation: OR = 0.46, 95 % CI 0.33–0.65, p < 0.00001, n = 4
Clark, 2007 Heart failure TM or STS versus usual care All-cause hospital admission: STS (RR = 0.94, 95 % CI 0.87 –1.02, p = 0.15, n = 7). TM (RR = 0.95, 95 % CI 0.89–1.02, p = 0.83, n = 2). HF-related hospitalization: STS (RR = 0.78, 95 % CI 0.68–0.89, p = 0.0003, n = 9) TM (RR = 0.79, 95%CI 0.69–0.89, p = 0.45, n = 1).
Klersy, 2009 Heart failure RPM versus control All-cause hospitalisation: RCT (RR = 0.93; 95 % CI 0.73–0.95; p = 0.030, n = 11) Cohort studies (RR = 0.52; 95 % CI 0.28–0.96; p < 0.001, n = 3) CHF-related hospitalisations: RCT (RR = 0.71; 95 % CI 0.64–0.80; p < 0.001, n = 13) when compared with usual care.
Polisena, 2009 Heart failure TM versus usual care No of patients hospitalised all-cause: RR = 0.77; 95 % CI 0.65–0.90, n = 4
Inglis, 2010 Heart failure STS or TM versus usual care All-cause hospitalisation: STS (RR = 0.91, 95 % CI 0.85–0.99, p = 0.02, n = 11) and TM (RR = 0.92, 95 % CI 0.84–0.99, p = 0.02, n = 8). CHF-related hospitalisation – STS (RR = 0.77, 95 % CI 0.68–0.87, p < 0.0001, n = 13) and TM (RR = 0.79, 95 % CI 0.67–0.94, p = 0.008, n = 4)
Clarke, 2011 Heart failure TM versus usual care All-cause hospital admission: RR = 0.99, 95 % CI 0.88–1.11, p = 0.84, n = 6). CHF-related hospital admission: RR = 0.73, 95 % CI 0.62–0.87, p = 0.0004, n = 6)
Pandor, 2013 Heart failure TM with medical support in office hours (TM Office), TM with medical support 24/4 (TM 24/7), Human to machine STS (STS HM) or Human to human STS (STS HH) versus control All-cause hospitalisation: TM Office (HR: 0.75, 95 % CrI: 0.49–1.10, p = NR, n = 6). TM 24/7 (HR: 0.81, 95 % CrI: 0.33–2.00, p = NR, n = 1). STS HM (HR: 1.06, 95 % CrI: 0.44–2.53, p = NR, n = 1). STS HH (HR: 0.97, 95 % CrI: 0.70, 1.31, p = NR, n = 9). CHF-related hospitalisation: TM Office (HR: 0.95, 95 % CrI: 0.70, 1.34, p = NR, n = 3). STS HM (HR: 1.03, 95 % CrI: 0.66, 1.54, p = NR, n = 1). STS HH (HR: 0.77, 95 % CrI: 0.62, 0.96, p = NR, n = 8).
Turnock, 2005 COPD Action planning versus usual care All-cause hospitalisation: WMD = 0.16, 95 % CI −0.09–0.42, p = 0.21, n = 2
  1. TM telemonitoring, STS structured telephone support, RR relative risk, OR odds ratio, HR hazard ratio, WMD weighted mean difference, CI confidence interval, Crl Credible interval, NR not reported