Cited by 68Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationCongenital Heart Disease StudiesAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare

Home Videoconferencing for Patients with Severe Congential Heart Disease Following Discharge

Morgan, Gareth J., Craig, Brian, Grant, Brian, Sands, Andrew, Doherty, Nicola, Casey, Frank·2008·Congenital Heart Disease

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Centralization of pediatric cardiology services into a small number of tertiary centers and the particular stress that accompanies diagnosis and surgical management of severe congenital heart disease (CHD) renders psychological support for families and clinical monitoring of patients following discharge increasingly important. Telemedicine has an increasing role in clinical and academic medicine. Improvements in quality and reliability of videoconferencing systems have allowed this to become a useful diagnostic tool. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the benefits of home monitoring by videoconferencing compared with contacting by telephone only, in terms of decreasing anxiety levels and clinical monitoring in the postdischarge period. METHODS: We performed a prospective, controlled study of children with a recent diagnosis of severe CHD and those recovering from palliative or corrective surgery for severe CHD. We used standardized anxiety scores to assess anxiety after discharge in families followed up by home videoconferencing or telephone calls and assessed the clinical information available through videoconferencing or telephone calls by structured questionnaires. RESULTS: Videoconferencing decreased anxiety levels compared with telephone calls (P < .05). Improved clinical information was available in the videoconferencing group, resulting in more appropriate and timely hospital attendance. CONCLUSION: Videoconferencing is acceptable to parents and physicians and provides a more effective form of follow-up in terms of clinical observation and parental anxiety levels.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1747-0803.2008.00205.x

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morgan, G. J., Craig, B., Grant, B., Sands, A., Doherty, N., & Casey, F.
Affiliations
Royal Belfast Hospital for Sick Children (GB)
Corresponding author
Morgan, Gareth J.
Venue
Congenital Heart Disease
Published
2008-09
Volume
3
Issue
5
Pages
317-324
ISSN
  • 1747-079X (ISSN-L)
  • 1747-0803
OpenAlex
W2015039939
Cited by
68
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Congenital Heart Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Adolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Keywords
telemedicine, severe congenital heart disease, post-discharge follow-up, parental anxiety, telephone follow-up, pediatric cardiology, palliative surgery, corrective cardiac surgery, psychological support for families
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Child, Heart Defects, Congenital, Cardiac Surgical Procedures, Humans, Parents, Patient Discharge, Postoperative Complications, Prospective Studies, Social Support, Telephone, Health Care Costs, Patient Satisfaction, Videoconferencing

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