Division of Rheumatology, Fundacion Valle del Lili, Cali, Colombia.
Internal Medicine and Rheumatology Fundacion Universitaria de Ciencias de la Salud, Bogota, Colombia.
Telemed J E Health. 2022 Dec;28(12):1852-1860. doi: 10.1089/tmj.2022.0098. Epub 2022 Jul 14.
The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine compared to standard care for patients with rheumatic diseases. A search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; for the gray literature, GREYNET databases and a snowball search were used. MeSH or Emtree terms. Three authors independently selected systematic reviews, randomized controlled trail (RCTs), or non-RCTs with patients with autoimmune or inflammatory rheumatic diseases, where telemedicine was compared with standard care. Effectiveness was measured in terms of disease activity, quality of life, and functional activity. The patients' satisfaction was also measured. The risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane collaboration tool for RCTs and AMSTAR II for systematic reviews. Four RCTs, one cross-out study, and five systematic reviews were included. The studies were conducted with rheumatoid arthritis patients, and one study involved patients with systematic lupus erythematosus. The interventions mainly involved teleconsultation and telemonitoring, with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) being compared with standard care. Four studies measured the effectiveness of telemedicine using PROs, in which three of the RCTs did not find differences in the clinical outcomes, and one found that telemedicine improved the remission of diseases, functional impairment, and radiographic joint damage progression. Two studies measured patient satisfaction with telemedicine and standard care without a significant difference between the groups. Despite heterogeneity between studies, the findings were remarkably consistent in demonstrating that there was no significant difference between the telemedicine group and the control group in terms of PROs and patient satisfaction. Patients should be offered the option of telemedicine to manage their diseases as part of health-care support. Further research is needed on the effectiveness of telemedicine in the long term for patients with rheumatic diseases.
本研究旨在系统回顾远程医疗相对于标准护理在风湿性疾病患者中的有效性证据。在 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 系统评价数据库中进行了检索;对于灰色文献,使用了 GREYNET 数据库和滚雪球搜索。使用 MeSH 或 Emtree 术语。三位作者独立选择了与自身免疫性或炎症性风湿性疾病患者相关的系统评价、随机对照试验(RCT)或非 RCT,其中远程医疗与标准护理进行了比较。有效性通过疾病活动度、生活质量和功能活动来衡量。还测量了患者的满意度。通过 Cochrane 协作工具评估 RCT 的偏倚风险和 AMSTAR II 评估系统评价的偏倚风险。纳入了四项 RCT、一项交叉研究和五项系统评价。这些研究均针对类风湿关节炎患者进行,其中一项研究涉及系统性红斑狼疮患者。干预措施主要涉及远程咨询和远程监测,将患者报告的结局(PROs)与标准护理进行比较。四项研究使用 PROs 测量远程医疗的有效性,其中三项 RCT 未发现临床结局的差异,一项研究发现远程医疗改善了疾病缓解、功能障碍和放射学关节损伤进展。两项研究测量了患者对远程医疗和标准护理的满意度,两组之间没有显著差异。尽管研究之间存在异质性,但研究结果非常一致,表明在 PROs 和患者满意度方面,远程医疗组与对照组之间没有显著差异。应该为患者提供远程医疗管理疾病的选择,作为医疗保健支持的一部分。需要进一步研究远程医疗对风湿性疾病患者的长期有效性。