Department of Cardiology, Zentrum Für Innere Medizin (ZIM), Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Germany.
Department of Cardiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Eur J Med Res. 2023 Jan 11;28(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s40001-023-00991-1.
Healthcare concepts for chronic diseases based on tele-monitoring have become increasingly important during COVID-19 pandemic.
To study the effectiveness of a novel integrated care concept (NICC) that combines tele-monitoring with the support of a call centre in addition to guideline therapy for patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension.
A prospective, parallel-group, open-label, randomized, controlled trial.
Between December 2017 and August 2019 at the Rostock University Medical Center (Germany).
Including 960 patients with either atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension.
Patients were randomized to either NICC (n = 478) or standard-of-care (SoC) (n = 482) in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the NICC group received a combination of tele-monitoring and intensive follow-up and care through a call centre.
Three primary endpoints were formulated: (1) composite of all-cause mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction; (2) number of inpatient days; (3) the first plus cardiac decompensation, all measured at 12-months follow-up. Superiority was evaluated using a hierarchical multiple testing strategy for the 3 primary endpoints, where the first step is to test the second primary endpoint (hospitalization) at two-sided 5%-significance level. In case of a non-significant difference between the groups for the rate of hospitalization, the superiority of NICC over SoC is not shown.
The first primary endpoint occurred in 1.5% of NICC and 5.2% of SoC patients (OR: 3.3 [95%CI 1.4-8.3], p = 0.009). The number of inpatient treatment days did not differ significantly between both groups (p = 0.122). The third primary endpoint occurred in 3.6% of NICC and 8.1% of SoC patients (OR: 2.2 [95%CI 1.2-4.2], p = 0.016). Four patients died of all-cause death in the NICC and 23 in the SoC groups (OR: 4.4 [95%CI 1.6-12.6], p = 0.006). Based on the prespecified hierarchical statistical analysis protocol for multiple testing, the trial did not meet its primary outcome measure.
Among patients with atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or treatment-resistant hypertension, the NICC approach was not superior over SoC, despite a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction and cardiac decompensation. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03317951.
在 COVID-19 大流行期间,基于远程监测的慢性病医疗保健理念变得越来越重要。
研究一种新型综合护理概念(NICC)的效果,该概念将远程监测与呼叫中心的支持相结合,此外还有指导方针治疗,用于治疗心房颤动、心力衰竭或治疗抵抗性高血压的患者。
前瞻性、平行组、开放标签、随机、对照试验。
德国罗斯托克大学医学中心(2017 年 12 月至 2019 年 8 月)。
包括 960 名患有心房颤动、心力衰竭或治疗抵抗性高血压的患者。
患者按 1:1 的比例随机分为 NICC(n=478)或标准护理(SoC)(n=482)组。NICC 组患者接受远程监测和通过呼叫中心进行强化随访和护理的组合。
制定了三个主要终点:(1)全因死亡率、中风和心肌梗死的综合指标;(2)住院天数;(3)首次加心脏失代偿,均在 12 个月随访时测量。使用三级多重检验策略评估三个主要终点的优越性,其中第一步是在双侧 5%显著性水平下检验次要终点(住院)。如果两组患者的住院率没有显著差异,则表明 NICC 并不优于 SoC。
NICC 组和 SoC 组的第一个主要终点发生率分别为 1.5%和 5.2%(比值比:3.3[95%置信区间:1.4-8.3],p=0.009)。两组患者的住院天数无显著差异(p=0.122)。第三个主要终点在 NICC 组和 SoC 组中的发生率分别为 3.6%和 8.1%(比值比:2.2[95%置信区间:1.2-4.2],p=0.016)。NICC 组有 4 例患者死于任何原因的死亡,SoC 组有 23 例(比值比:4.4[95%置信区间:1.6-12.6],p=0.006)。根据预设的多重检验层次统计分析方案,该试验未达到主要终点。
在患有心房颤动、心力衰竭或治疗抵抗性高血压的患者中,NICC 方法并不优于 SoC,尽管全因死亡率、中风、心肌梗死和心脏失代偿的发生率显著降低。
ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT03317951。