Algorithms used in telemonitoring programmes for patients with chronic heart failure: A systematic review.
Maaike Brons, Stefan Koudstaal, Folkert W Asselbergs
PMID 29954184WHAT IT FOUND
Only 20 of 99 heart failure telemonitoring studies reported the algorithm used.
Bodyweight was most common, nurses often monitored alerts, but thresholds and response steps varied, so it does not show which protocol works.
Key findings
01Only 20 of 99 eligible telemonitoring studies reported information on the algorithm used.
02Bodyweight was the most common biometric parameter, used in 96% of programmes, followed by blood pressure at 85% and heart rate at 61%.
03In 11 studies, alert triggers were monitored by a nurse, and in most studies nurses interpreted the data.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 20 of 99 eligible studies reported algorithm details, so the review cannot describe the full range of programmes. No included study was judged at low risk of bias. The review included only fully published English-language studies. It did not test whether telemonitoring algorithms improve patient outcomes. Medication titration protocols and response actions were often unclear.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflict of interest. An author was supported by a University College London Hospitals National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that telemonitoring prevents heart failure deterioration. The review described how algorithms were reported and monitored, not patient outcomes, and no included study was at low risk of bias.