ArticleERJ open research2026
Integrating remote patient monitoring into pulmonary rehabilitation: a feasibility randomised controlled trial.
Article in ERJ open research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Digital remote patient monitoring (DRPM) may enhance pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) by supporting continuous symptom tracking and early intervention, key features of effective disease management. This study examined the feasibility of integrating DRPM within a structured PR programme. Methods: This was a parallel-group, single-centre, cluster-randomised clinical trial embedded within a quality improvement initiative. Patients were allocated to Standard-PR (16 PR sessions delivered over 6 or 8 weeks) or PR+DRPM. In addition to Standard-PR, the PR+DRPM group remotely monitored and transmitted blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation, body temperature and weight data daily to PR staff during PR and for 12 weeks post-PR. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment, retention, adherence, acceptability, patient safety and impact on clinician workload. Secondary outcomes explored whether DRPM influenced self-management behaviours while preserving established benefits of PR. Results: 78 of 83 eligible patients approached were enrolled (94% recruitment rate; 55% male; mean±sd age 68.4±11 years; mean±sd forced expiratory volume in 1 s 59.1±22.7% predicted). Participant retention was 77% post-PR and 68% at the 12-week follow-up, with similar rates between groups. DRPM adherence was 90% during PR and 89% at follow-up. 100% of participants would recommend DRPM to other patients. A total of 163 compliance calls were made by the vendor. PR staff workload increased by 45 min per participant in the PR+DRPM group addressing DRPM-generated alerts. Conclusion: Integrating DRPM into PR was feasible based on pre-specified benchmarks, but substantially increased provider workload, underscoring the need for workflow optimisation before initiating a larger trial.
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.