Cited by 71Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTechnology Use by Older Adults

Telehealth for the Longitudinal Management of Chronic Conditions: Systematic Review

Open access
Lewinski, Allison A, Walsh, Conor, Rushton, Sharron, Soliman, Diana, Carlson, Scott M, Luedke, Matthew W, Halpern, David J, Crowley, Matthew J +15 more·2022·Journal of Medical Internet Research

Abstract

Background: Extensive literature support telehealth as a supplement or adjunct to in-person care for the management of chronic conditions such as congestive heart failure (CHF) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Evidence is needed to support the use of telehealth as an equivalent and equitable replacement for in-person care and to assess potential adverse effects. Objective: We conducted a systematic review to address the following question: among adults, what is the effect of synchronous telehealth (real-time response among individuals via phone or phone and video) compared with in-person care (or compared with phone, if synchronous video care) for chronic management of CHF, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and T2DM on key disease-specific clinical outcomes and health care use? Methods: We followed systematic review methodologies and searched two databases (MEDLINE and Embase). We included randomized or quasi-experimental studies that evaluated the effect of synchronously delivered telehealth for relevant chronic conditions that occurred over ≥2 encounters and in which some or all in-person care was supplanted by care delivered via phone or video. We assessed the bias using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care risk of bias (ROB) tool and the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. We described the findings narratively and did not conduct meta-analysis owing to the small number of studies and the conceptual heterogeneity of the identified interventions. Results: We identified 8662 studies, and 129 (1.49%) were reviewed at the full-text stage. In total, 3.9% (5/129) of the articles were retained for data extraction, all of which (5/5, 100%) were randomized controlled trials. The CHF study (1/5, 20%) was found to have high ROB and randomized patients (n=210) to receive quarterly automated asynchronous web-based review and follow-up of telemetry data versus synchronous personal follow-up (in-person vs phone-based) for 1 year. A 3-way comparison across study arms found no significant differences in clinical outcomes. Overall, 80% (4/5) of the studies (n=466) evaluated synchronous care for patients with T2DM (ROB was judged to be low for 2, 50% of studies and high for 2, 50% of studies). In total, 20% (1/5) of the studies were adequately powered to assess the difference in glycosylated hemoglobin level between groups; however, no significant difference was found. Intervention design varied greatly from remote monitoring of blood glucose combined with video versus in-person visits to an endocrinology clinic to a brief, 3-week remote intervention to stabilize uncontrolled diabetes. No articles were identified for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Conclusions: This review found few studies with a variety of designs and interventions that used telehealth as a replacement for in-person care. Future research should consider including observational studies and studies on additional highly prevalent chronic diseases.

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 · 10.2196/37100

Cites

39 of 40 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?

  • A systematic review of longitudinal management of chronic conditions by telehealth interventions reported no difference between asynchronous and in-person (synchronous) reviews of patient data.

    “A systematic review of longitudinal management of chronic conditions by telehealth interventions [8] reported no difference between asynchronous and in-person (synchronous) reviews of patient data.”

    From Digital Interventions for Self-Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis (2024) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Abstract Results and the CHF findings in the Results section report no significant differences in measured clinical outcomes between asynchronous telemetry review and personal follow-up, including in-person visits. This finding comes from one high-risk-of-bias heart-failure study; it does not establish a general absence of differences between asynchronous and in-person reviews of patient data across chronic conditions. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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: 4

  1. [3]Artandi M Thomas S Shah NR Srinivasan M Rapid system transformation to more than 75% primary care video visits within three weeks at Stanford: response to public safety crisis during a pandemic NEJM Catalyst 2020 4 21 2021-07-12 https://catalyst.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/CAT.20.0100 · DOI
  2. [5]Mehrotra A Ray K Brockmeyer DM Barnett ML Bender JA Rapidly Converting to “Virtual Practices”: Outpatient Care in the Era of Covid-19 NEJM Catalyst 2020 4 1 2021-07-13 https://catalyst.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/CAT.20.0091 · DOI
  3. [22]Walsh C Lewinski AA Rushton S Soliman D Carlson SM Luedke MW Halpern DJ Crowley MJ Shaw RJ Alexopoulos AS Tabriz AA Dietch JR Uthappa DM Hwang S Ball Ricks KA Cantrell S Kosinski AS Ear B Gordon AM Gierisch JM Williams JW Goldstein KM Virtual Care for the Longitudinal Management of Chronic Conditions: A Systematic Review Health Services Research & Development 2021 2022-07-09 Washington, DC, USA U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs http://vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/publications/esp/virtual-care.cfm 36108114
  4. [28]EPOC resources for review authors Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care 2020-05-12 https://epoc.cochrane.org/resources/epoc-resources-review-authors

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lewinski, A. A., Walsh, C., Rushton, S., Soliman, D., Carlson, S. M., Luedke, M. W., Halpern, D. J., Crowley, M. J., Shaw, R. J., Sharpe, J. A., Alexopoulos, A.-S., Tabriz, A. A., Dietch, J. R., Uthappa, D. M., Hwang, S., Ball Ricks, K. A., Cantrell, S., Kosinski, A. S., Ear, B., Gordon, A. M., Gierisch, J. M., Williams Jr, J. W., & Goldstein, K. M.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • Duke Medical Center (US)
  • Durham VA Health Care System (US)
  • Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
  • Oregon State University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Lewinski, Allison A
Venue
Journal of Medical Internet Research
Published
2022-08-26
Volume
24
Issue
8
Pages
e37100
ISSN
1438-8871 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4293125272
Cited by
71
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (CIN 13–410, ESP-09-010, 18-234)
  • Office of Research and Development
  • Health Services Research and Development (#18-234, CIN 13‐410)
  • Quality Enhancement Research Initiative
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
Keywords
telemedicine, synchronous telehealth, chronic disease management, congestive heart failure, type 2 diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, HbA1c, health care utilization, adverse effects, risk of bias, health equity, remote patient monitoring, telephone care, glycemic control, health care costs
MeSH terms
Adult, Chronic Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Heart Failure, Humans, Telemedicine, Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, Text Messaging

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