Cited by 27Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Explaining the mixed findings of a randomised controlled trial of telehealth with centralised remote support for heart failure: multi-site qualitative study using the NASSS framework

Open access
Papoutsi, Chrysanthi, A’Court, Christine, Wherton, Joseph, Shaw, Sara, Greenhalgh, Trisha·2020·Trials

Abstract

Background: The SUPPORT-HF2 randomised controlled trial compared telehealth technology alone with the same technology combined with centralised remote support, in which a clinician responds promptly to biomarker changes. The intervention was implemented differently in different sites; no overall impact was found on the primary endpoint (proportion of patients on optimum treatment). We sought to explain the trial’s findings in a qualitative evaluation. Methods: Fifty-one people (25 patients, 3 carers, 18 clinicians, 4 additional researchers) were interviewed and observed in 7 UK trial sites in 2016–2018. We collected 110 pages of documents. The analysis was informed by the NASSS framework, a multi-level theoretical lens which considers non-adoption and abandonment of technologies by individuals and challenges to scale-up, spread and sustainability. In particular, we used NASSS to tease out why a ‘standardised’ socio-technical intervention played out differently in different sites. Results: Patients’ experiences of the technology were largely positive, though influenced by the nature and severity of their illness. In each trial site, existing services, staffing levels, technical capacity and previous telehealth experiences influenced how the complex intervention of ‘telehealth technology plus centralised specialist remote support’ was interpreted and the extent to which it was adopted and used to its full potential. In some sites, the intervention was quickly mobilised to fill significant gaps in service provision. In others, it was seen as usefully extending the existing care model for selected patients. Elsewhere, the new model was actively resisted and the technology little used. In one site, centralised provision of specialist advice aligned awkwardly with an existing community-based heart failure support service. Conclusions: Complex socio-technical interventions, even when implemented in a so-called standardised way with uniform inclusion and exclusion criteria, are inevitably implemented differently in different local settings because of how individual staff members interpret the technology and the trial protocol and because of the practical realities and path dependencies of local organisations. Site-specific iteration and embedding of a new technology-supported complex intervention may be required (in addition to co-design of the user interface) before such interventions are ready for testing in clinical trials. Trial registration: BMC ISRCTN Registry 86212709. Retrospectively registered on 5 September 2014

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13063-020-04817-x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The NASSS has been utilized prospectively and retrospectively to assess patient-oriented technologies and tools for decision-making.

    “The surge in interest reflects the widespread adoption of the NASSS, which has been utilized prospectively and retrospectively to assess patient-oriented technologies and tools for decision-making purposes [12,13].”

    From The NASSS (Non-Adoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability) framework use over time: A scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [13]

    The Methods (Theoretical framework; page unavailable) and Results (page unavailable) describe using NASSS to analyse a patient-facing heart-failure telehealth intervention across trial sites. The paper does not establish that NASSS was used both prospectively and retrospectively, or as a decision-making tool; it describes its use as an analytical framework for this study. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [23]Di Lenarda A Casolo G Gulizia MM Aspromonte N Scalvini S Mortara A Alunni G Ricci RP Mantovan R Russo G ANMCO/SIC/SIT Consensus document: the future of telemedicine in heart failure G Ital Cardiol 2016 17 6 491 507 27311090

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Papoutsi, C., A’Court, C., Wherton, J., Shaw, S., & Greenhalgh, T.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Greenhalgh, Trisha
Venue
Trials
Published
2020-10-27
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
891-891
ISSN
1745-6215 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3096303332
Cited by
26
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4
FWCI
2.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Trials (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (WT104830MA)
  • NIHR (BRC-1215-20008)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
heart failure, telemedicine, socio-technical interventions, NASSS framework, service gaps, patient and caregiver experiences
MeSH terms
Heart Failure, Humans, Telemedicine, Qualitative Research

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