Donelle Lorie, Hiebert Bradley, Warner Grace, Reid Michael, Reid Jennifer, Shariff Salimah, Richard Emily, Regan Sandra, Weeks Lori, Ledoux Kathleen
College of Nursing, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, United States.
Arthur Labatt Family School of Nursing, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
JMIR Aging. 2025 Mar 19;8:e69107. doi: 10.2196/69107.
Researchers in Nova Scotia and Ontario, Canada, implemented a passive remote monitoring (PRM) model of home care unique to their health system contexts. Each PRM model integrated tailored PRM devices (eg, motion sensors, cameras, and door alarms) into home care patients' residences with the aim of linking patients, family and friend caregivers, and health care providers to support older adults' aging in place.
The purpose of this study was to examine the use of PRM technologies in the home to support older adults' safe aging in place and avoidance or delay of higher levels of care.
This multiprovincial pragmatic randomized controlled trial examined how PRM technologies support older adults to safely remain in their home and avoid or delay admission to higher levels of care. Pairs of home care patients and their family and friend caregivers were recruited in Ontario and Nova Scotia. Participant pairs were randomly assigned to one of two conditions: (1) standard home care (ie, control) or (2) standard home care plus study-provided PRM (ie, intervention). Participants provided their provincial health insurance numbers to link with provincial health administrative databases and identify if patients were admitted to higher levels of care after 1 year. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the primary outcome in each province.
In total, 313 patient-caregiver pairs were recruited: 174 pairs in Ontario (intervention: n=60; control: n=114) and 139 pairs in Nova Scotia (intervention: n=45; control: n=94). Results indicate PRM was associated with a nonsignificant 30% reduction in risk of patients being admitted to higher levels of care in Ontario (hazard ratio 0.7, 95% CI 0.3-1.4) and no reduction in risk in Nova Scotia (hazard ratio 1.1, 95% CI 0.3-3.7). Adjusting for patient sex had no impact on model estimates for either province.
Limitations related, in part, to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to the effectiveness of the intervention. While our study did not yield statistically significant results (P=.30 and P=.90) regarding the effectiveness of the PRM model in prolonging home stays, the observed trends suggest that technology-assisted aging in place may be a valuable goal for older adults. Further study is required to understand if longer follow-up time allows more effects of PRM on patients' avoidance of higher levels of care to be detected.
ISRCTN ISRCTN79884651; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN79884651.
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/15027.
加拿大新斯科舍省和安大略省的研究人员实施了一种与各自卫生系统背景相适应的家庭护理被动远程监测(PRM)模式。每种PRM模式都将定制的PRM设备(如运动传感器、摄像头和门报警器)集成到家庭护理患者的住所中,目的是将患者、家人和朋友护理人员以及医疗保健提供者联系起来,以支持老年人居家养老。
本研究的目的是探讨在家中使用PRM技术以支持老年人安全地居家养老,并避免或延迟接受更高水平的护理。
这项多省实用随机对照试验研究了PRM技术如何支持老年人安全地留在家中,并避免或延迟入住更高水平的护理机构。在安大略省和新斯科舍省招募了成对的家庭护理患者及其家人和朋友护理人员。参与者对被随机分配到两种情况之一:(1)标准家庭护理(即对照组)或(2)标准家庭护理加研究提供的PRM(即干预组)。参与者提供他们的省级医疗保险号码,以便与省级卫生行政数据库链接,并确定患者在1年后是否入住了更高水平的护理机构。使用Cox比例风险模型评估每个省份的主要结局。
总共招募了313对患者-护理人员:安大略省174对(干预组:n = 60;对照组:n = 114),新斯科舍省139对(干预组:n = 45;对照组:n = 94)。结果表明,在安大略省,PRM与患者入住更高水平护理机构的风险非显著降低30%相关(风险比0.7,95%置信区间0.3 - 1.4),而在新斯科舍省,风险没有降低(风险比1.1,95%置信区间0.3 - 3.7)。调整患者性别对两个省份的模型估计均无影响。
部分与2019冠状病毒病大流行影响相关的局限性可能导致了干预措施的效果。虽然我们的研究在PRM模式延长居家时间的有效性方面未得出具有统计学意义的结果(P = 0.30和P = 0.90),但观察到的趋势表明,技术辅助的居家养老可能是老年人的一个有价值的目标。需要进一步研究以了解更长的随访时间是否能使PRM对患者避免接受更高水平护理的更多影响被检测到。
ISRCTN ISRCTN79884651;https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN79884651。
国际注册报告识别号(IRRID):RR2 - 10.2196/15027。