Vindrola-Padros Cecilia, Singh Kelly E, Sidhu Manbinder S, Georghiou Theo, Sherlaw-Johnson Chris, Tomini Sonila M, Inada-Kim Matthew, Kirkham Karen, Streetly Allison, Cohen Nathan, Fulop Naomi J
Department of Targeted Intervention, University College London (UCL), Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London W1W 7TY, United Kingdom.
Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Park House, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2RT, UK.
EClinicalMedicine. 2021 Jul;37:100965. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100965. Epub 2021 Jun 23.
the aim of this review was to analyze the implementation and impact of remote home monitoring models (virtual wards) for confirmed or suspected COVID-19 patients, identifying their main components, processes of implementation, target patient populations, impact on outcomes, costs and lessons learnt.
we carried out a rapid systematic review on models led by primary and secondary care across seven countries (US, Australia, Canada, The Netherlands, Ireland, China, UK). The main outcomes included in the review were: impact of remote home monitoring on virtual length of stay, escalation, emergency department attendance/reattendance, admission/readmission and mortality. The search was updated on February 2021. We used the PRISMA statement and the review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD: 42020202888).
the review included 27 articles. The aim of the models was to maintain patients safe in the appropriate setting. Most models were led by secondary care and confirmation of COVID-19 was not required (in most cases). Monitoring was carried via online platforms, paper-based systems with telephone calls or (less frequently) through wearable sensors. Models based on phone calls were considered more inclusive. Patient/career training was identified as a determining factor of success. We could not reach substantive conclusions regarding patient safety and the identification of early deterioration due to lack of standardized reporting and missing data. Economic analysis was not reported for most of the models and did not go beyond reporting resources used and the amount spent per patient monitored.
future research should focus on staff and patient experiences of care and inequalities in patients' access to care. Attention needs to be paid to the cost-effectiveness of the models and their sustainability, evaluation of their impact on patient outcomes by using comparators, and the use of risk-stratification tools.
本综述旨在分析针对确诊或疑似新冠肺炎患者的远程居家监测模式(虚拟病房)的实施情况及影响,确定其主要组成部分、实施流程、目标患者群体、对结局的影响、成本及经验教训。
我们对美国、澳大利亚、加拿大、荷兰、爱尔兰、中国、英国这七个国家由初级和二级医疗主导的模式进行了快速系统综述。该综述纳入的主要结局包括:远程居家监测对虚拟住院时长、病情升级、急诊科就诊/再次就诊、入院/再次入院及死亡率的影响。检索于2021年2月更新。我们采用了PRISMA声明,该综述已在PROSPERO注册(注册号:CRD: 42020202888)。
该综述纳入了27篇文章。这些模式的目的是在适当环境中保障患者安全。大多数模式由二级医疗主导,且大多情况下不需要确诊新冠肺炎。监测通过在线平台、基于纸质系统并结合电话进行,或(较少)通过可穿戴传感器进行。基于电话的模式被认为更具包容性。患者/照护者培训被确定为成功的决定因素。由于缺乏标准化报告和数据缺失,我们无法就患者安全及早期病情恶化的识别得出实质性结论。大多数模式未报告经济分析,且经济分析未超出报告所使用的资源及每位监测患者的花费金额。
未来研究应聚焦于医护人员及患者的照护体验以及患者获得照护的不平等问题。需要关注这些模式的成本效益及其可持续性,通过使用对照物评估其对患者结局的影响,以及风险分层工具的使用。