Cited by 14Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Akzeptanz einer telemedizinischen Intervention bei Patienten mit chronisch-obstruktiver Lungenerkrankung

Karg, O., Weber, M., Bubulj, C., Esche, B., Weber, N., Geiseler, J., Bachl, C., Schellhorn, H.·2012·DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this trial was to assess the acceptance of a telemonitoring device (Health Buddy®) by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The device makes it possible to monitor vital parameters and to ask questions about symptoms, behavior and disease-specific knowledge. METHOD: A single-arm non-randomized clinical study was performed for three months in 43 patients with severe/very severe COPD. The primary intent was to determine the patients' compliance with the device. In addition the patients were questioned about their general acceptance of the telemonitoring intervention, their quality of life and the overall use of resources. RESULTS: 36 patients (25 men, 11 women, mean age 67,9 ± 6,9; range 54 - 81 years) completed the protocol. All 43 patients were using the device (Health Buddy®) on two thirds of all possible working days (this had been predefined as full compliance). Especially the questions on technical functioning of the device, trust in the technique and data security, as well as the confidentiality of communication with the physician via telemedicine were very positively answered. Health-related quality of life did not change and no rise of autonomy was noted. However, the objective of early detecting of acute exacerbations by daily measurements of vital parameters and assessment of symptoms was difficult to achieve because of inadequate definition of the parameters. CONCLUSION: This cohort of patients with advanced COPD was highly compliant in the use of the telemonitoring device. But clinical efficacy and economic effectiveness remain to be investigated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1055/s-0031-1299033

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Karg, O., Weber, M., Bubulj, C., Esche, B., Weber, N., Geiseler, J., Bachl, C., & Schellhorn, H.
Affiliations
  • Asklepios Fachkliniken München-Gauting (DE)
  • Starnberg Hospital (DE)
  • Pneumologisches Netzwerk Südbayern e.V.
  • Robert Bosch (Germany) (DE)
Corresponding author
Karg, O.
Venue
DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift
Published
2012-03
Volume
137
Issue
12
Pages
574-579
ISSN
  • 0012-0472 (ISSN-L)
  • 1439-4413
OpenAlex
W134370078
Cited by
13
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.93
Type
journal article
Language
de
Open access
closed
Locations
  • DMW - Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, remote patient monitoring, patient acceptance, device compliance, health-related quality of life, vital signs monitoring, patient autonomy, data security
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Germany, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oximetry, Patient Compliance, Pilot Projects, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Remote Sensing Technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review