Trial reportBMC health services research2024
Experiences with telemedicine-based follow-up of chronic conditions: the views of patients and health personnel enrolled in a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT04142710 (A Pragmatic Randomized Control Trial Comparing Telehealth With Standard Clinical Care in the Follow-up of Patients With Chronic Conditions Within the Primary Care Setting), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Pragmatic Randomized Control Trial Comparing Telehealth With Standard Clinical Care in the Follow-up of Patients With Chronic Conditions Within the Primary Care Setting
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pragmatic randomized controlled trial comparing a complex telemedicine-based intervention with usual care in patients with chronic conditions.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2024Trial
- Nursing-Led Support Across the Standard Care-Clinical Trial-Standard Care Pathway in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Review With Realist-Informed Interpretation.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Review
- Digital Outpatient Care for Patients With Type 1 Diabetes (DigiDiaS): Pragmatic Observational Pre-Post Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
- Experiences and opinion of medical professionals regarding the use of telemedicine tools in management of patients with chronic diseases: a cross-sectional survey.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Key Factors Associated With Nonuse of Telemedicine in Patients With Hypertension and/or Diabetes: Findings From the 2023 Indonesia Health Survey.International journal of telemedicine and applications · 2026Article
- Remotely Monitored Patients' Experiences of the Interpersonal Patient-Nurse Relationship: A Scoping Review.Scandinavian journal of caring sciences · 2025Article
- TeleAllergy: Potential of Telemedicine in Management of Patients With Allergies.JMIR human factors · 2025Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTelemedicine is often promoted as a possible solution to some of the challenges healthcare systems in many countries face, and an increasing number of studies evaluate the clinical effects. So far, the studies show varying results. Less attention has been paid to systemic factors, such as the context, implementation, and mechanisms of these interventions.
methodsThis study evaluates the experiences of patients and health personnel enrolled in a pragmatic randomized controlled trial comparing telemedicine-based follow-up of chronic conditions with usual care. Patients in the intervention group received an individual treatment plan together with computer tablets and home telemonitoring devices to report point-of-care measurements, e.g., blood pressure, blood glucose or oxygen saturation, and to respond to health related questions reported to a follow-up service. In response to abnormal measurement results, a follow-up service nurse would contact the patient and consider relevant actions. We conducted 49 interviews with patients and 77 interviews with health personnel and managers at the local centers. The interview data were analyzed using thematic analysis and based on recommendations for conducting process evaluation, considering three core aspects within the process of delivering a complex intervention: (1) context, (2) implementation, and (3) mechanisms of impact.
resultsPatients were mainly satisfied with the telemedicine-based service, and experienced increased safety and understanding of their symptoms and illness. Implementation of the service does, however, require dedicated resources over time. Slow adjustment of other healthcare providers may have contributed to the absence of reductions in the use of specialized healthcare and general practitioner (GP) services. An evident advantage of the service is its flexibility, yet this may also challenge cost-efficiency of the intervention.
conclusionsThe implementation of a telemedicine-based service in primary healthcare is a complex process that is sensitive to contextual factors and that requires time and dedicated resources to ensure successful implementation.
trial registrationThe trial was registered in www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04142710). Study start: 2019-02-09, Study completion: 2021-06-30, Study type: Interventional, Intervention/treatment: Telemedicine tablet and tools to perform measurements. Informed and documented consent was obtained from all subjects and next of kin participating in the study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.