Telemedicine monitoring of high-risk coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients by family medicine service after discharge from the emergency department.

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Family and Community Medicine Pub Date : 2021-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-09-07 DOI:10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_184_21
Imran Khalid, Maryam Imran, Manahil Imran, Saifullah Khan, Muhammad A Akhtar, Khadijah Amanullah, Tabindeh J Khalid
{"title":"Telemedicine monitoring of high-risk coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients by family medicine service after discharge from the emergency department.","authors":"Imran Khalid,&nbsp;Maryam Imran,&nbsp;Manahil Imran,&nbsp;Saifullah Khan,&nbsp;Muhammad A Akhtar,&nbsp;Khadijah Amanullah,&nbsp;Tabindeh J Khalid","doi":"10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_184_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Up to 25% of the total coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admissions comprise patients with comorbidities who present to the emergency department (ED) with only mild-to-moderate disease. It is unclear whether as an alternative to hospitalization, telemedicine can be used to monitor these \"high-risk\" comorbid patients. The aim of our study was to answer this question by comparing the outcome of such patients discharged under a family medicine service (FMS) telemonitoring program and those admitted to hospital.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Patients with three or more risk factors for progression to severe COVID-19 disease were designated as \"high-risk\" in our study. In the absence of acute indication for hospitalization, these high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate disease were discharged home under the supervision of FMS led telemonitoring between October 2020 and February 2021 and were labelled as \"Telemedicine group.\" They were compared to similar patients who were admitted to hospital between March-August 2020 before the implementation of telemedicine service (TMS) and were taken as \"Control group.\" Outcome measures included intubation, number of inpatient days, 28-day mortality and cost analysis for the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 572 COVID-19 patients who presented to the ED, 70 met the inclusion criteria for the \"Telemedicine Group\" and 35 were included in the \"Control Group\". In the Telemedicine group, 21 (30.0%) patients were brought back to ED for re-evaluation and 16 (22.9%) were eventually admitted to the hospital. There was no difference in terms of oxygen requirements, intubation, and intensive care unit admission (<i>P</i> > 0.74) between the groups, and none of the study patients died. The Family Medicine-led TMS saved 77% inpatient admissions and on average 4.4 hospital days and $3400 per patient (<i>P</i> < . 0001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Family medicine-led telemonitoring of high-risk COVID-19 patients presenting to the ED with mild-to-moderate disease is a feasible and cost-effective alternative to hospitalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":46862,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family and Community Medicine","volume":"28 3","pages":"210-216"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e6/8b/JFCM-28-210.PMC8496702.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family and Community Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_184_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/9/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: Up to 25% of the total coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admissions comprise patients with comorbidities who present to the emergency department (ED) with only mild-to-moderate disease. It is unclear whether as an alternative to hospitalization, telemedicine can be used to monitor these "high-risk" comorbid patients. The aim of our study was to answer this question by comparing the outcome of such patients discharged under a family medicine service (FMS) telemonitoring program and those admitted to hospital.

Materials and methods: Patients with three or more risk factors for progression to severe COVID-19 disease were designated as "high-risk" in our study. In the absence of acute indication for hospitalization, these high-risk patients with mild-to-moderate disease were discharged home under the supervision of FMS led telemonitoring between October 2020 and February 2021 and were labelled as "Telemedicine group." They were compared to similar patients who were admitted to hospital between March-August 2020 before the implementation of telemedicine service (TMS) and were taken as "Control group." Outcome measures included intubation, number of inpatient days, 28-day mortality and cost analysis for the two groups.

Results: Out of 572 COVID-19 patients who presented to the ED, 70 met the inclusion criteria for the "Telemedicine Group" and 35 were included in the "Control Group". In the Telemedicine group, 21 (30.0%) patients were brought back to ED for re-evaluation and 16 (22.9%) were eventually admitted to the hospital. There was no difference in terms of oxygen requirements, intubation, and intensive care unit admission (P > 0.74) between the groups, and none of the study patients died. The Family Medicine-led TMS saved 77% inpatient admissions and on average 4.4 hospital days and $3400 per patient (P < . 0001).

Conclusion: Family medicine-led telemonitoring of high-risk COVID-19 patients presenting to the ED with mild-to-moderate disease is a feasible and cost-effective alternative to hospitalization.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家庭医学服务对2019冠状病毒病高危患者急诊出院后的远程医疗监测
背景:在2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)总入院人数中,高达25%的患者患有合并症,仅患有轻度至中度疾病。目前尚不清楚作为住院治疗的替代方案,远程医疗是否可以用于监测这些“高风险”合并症患者。我们研究的目的是通过比较家庭医疗服务(FMS)远程监控项目下出院的患者和入院的患者的结果来回答这个问题。材料和方法:在我们的研究中,具有三个或三个以上进展为严重COVID-19疾病危险因素的患者被指定为“高风险”。在无急性住院指征的情况下,这些轻中度疾病高危患者于2020年10月至2021年2月在FMS主导的远程监护下出院,并标记为“远程医疗组”。他们与2020年3月至8月期间在实施远程医疗服务(TMS)之前入院的类似患者进行比较,并作为“对照组”。结果测量包括两组的插管、住院天数、28天死亡率和成本分析。结果:572例到急诊科就诊的COVID-19患者中,70例符合“远程医疗组”纳入标准,35例纳入“对照组”。在远程医疗组中,21例(30.0%)患者被带回急诊科重新评估,16例(22.9%)最终住院。两组患者在需氧量、插管和重症监护病房入院方面均无差异(P > 0.74),且无患者死亡。家庭医学主导的经颅磁刺激节省了77%的住院人数,平均4.4个住院日,每位患者节省了3400美元(P < 0.05)。0001)。结论:以家庭医学为主导的对就诊于急诊科的轻、中度疾病高危患者进行远程监护是一种可行且具有成本效益的替代方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Family and Community Medicine
Journal of Family and Community Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
3.70%
发文量
20
审稿时长
37 weeks
期刊最新文献
Predictors of depression among the elderly persons with disabilities in Indonesia. Effect of concept mapping model on critical thinking skills of family medicine residents: A randomized controlled trial. Effectiveness of the use of clickers versus group discussion in learning by undergraduate medical students. Early detection system of risk factors for diabetes mellitus type 2 utilization of machine learning-random forest. Outcomes of home-isolated coronavirus disease 2019 patients in Bahrain.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1