Potential, Pitfalls, and Future Directions for Remote Monitoring of Chronic Respiratory Diseases: Multicenter Mixed Methods Study in Routine Cystic Fibrosis Care
- PMID: 39106098
- PMCID: PMC11336494
- DOI: 10.2196/54942
Potential, Pitfalls, and Future Directions for Remote Monitoring of Chronic Respiratory Diseases: Multicenter Mixed Methods Study in Routine Cystic Fibrosis Care
Abstract
Background: The current literature inadequately addresses the extent to which remote monitoring should be integrated into care models for chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs).
Objective: This study examined a remote monitoring program (RMP) in cystic fibrosis (CF) by exploring experiences, future perspectives, and use behavior over 3 years, with the aim of developing future directions for remote monitoring in CRDs.
Methods: This was a mixed methods, multicenter, observational study in 5 Dutch CF centers following a sequential explanatory design. Self-designed questionnaires using the technology acceptance model were sent out to people with CF who had a minimum of 12 months of experience with the RMP and local health care professionals (HCPs). Questionnaire outcomes were used to inform semistructured interviews with HCPs and people with CF. Qualitative findings were reported following the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) checklist. Anonymous data on use frequency of all people with CF were analyzed.
Results: Between the second quarter of 2020 and the end of 2022, a total of 608 people with CF were enrolled in the program, and a total of 9418 lung function tests and 2631 symptom surveys were conducted. In total, 65% (24/37) of HCPs and 89% (72/81) of people with CF responded to the questionnaire, and 7 HCPs and 12 people with CF participated in semistructured interviews. Both people with CF and HCPs were positive about remote monitoring in CF care and found the RMP a good addition to daily care (people with CF: 44/72, 61%; HCPs: 21/24, 88%). Benefits ranged from supporting individual patients to reducing health care consumption. The most valued monitoring tool was home spirometry by both people with CF (66/72, 92%) and HCPs (22/24, 92%). Downsides included the potential to lose sight of patients and negative psychosocial effects, as 17% (12/72) of people with CF experienced some form of stress due to the RMP. A large majority of people with CF (59/72, 82%) and HCPs (22/24, 92%) wanted to keep using the RMP in future, with 79% (19/24) of HCPs and 75% (54/72) of people with CF looking forward to more replacement of in-person care with digital care during periods of well-being. Future perspectives for the RMP were centered on creating hybrid care models, personalizing remote care, and balancing individual benefits with monitoring burden.
Conclusions: Remote monitoring has considerable potential in supporting people with CF and HCPs within the CF care model. We identified 4 practice-based future directions for remote monitoring in CF and CRD care. The strategies, ranging from patient driven to prediction driven, can help clinicians, researchers, and policy makers navigate the rapidly changing digital health field, integrate remote monitoring into local care models, and align remote care with patient and clinician needs.
Keywords: chronic respiratory diseases; clinicians; cystic fibrosis; digital health; evaluation; health care professionals; interviews; mixed method; mixed methods; observational study; pediatrics; policy makers; psychosocial; qualitative study; remote monitoring; researchers; semistructured interview; telehealth; telemonitoring; telespirometry.
©Martinus C Oppelaar, Yvette Emond, Michiel A G E Bannier, Monique H E Reijers, Hester van der Vaart, Renske van der Meer, Josje Altenburg, Lennart Conemans, Bart L Rottier, Marianne Nuijsink, Lara S van den Wijngaart, Peter J F M Merkus, Maud Heinen, Jolt Roukema. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 06.08.2024.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest: None declared.
Figures
References
-
- GBD 2019 Chronic Respiratory Diseases Collaborators Global burden of chronic respiratory diseases and risk factors, 1990-2019: an update from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. EClinicalMedicine. 2023 May;59:101936. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.101936. https://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/37229504 S2589-5370(23)00113-X - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Dunn J, Coravos A, Fanarjian M, Ginsburg GS, Steinhubl SR. Remote digital health technologies for improving the care of people with respiratory disorders. Lancet Digit Health. 2024 Apr;6(4):e291–8. doi: 10.1016/S2589-7500(23)00248-0. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2589-7500(23)00248-0 S2589-7500(23)00248-0 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- 2023 Global Initiative for Asthma main report. Global Initiative for Asthma. 2023. Jul 10, [2023-11-03]. https://ginasthma.org/2023-gina-main-report/#:~:text=The%202023%20update... .
-
- Global strategy for prevention, diagnosis and management of COPD: 2023 report. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. 2023. [2023-11-03]. https://goldcopd.org/2023-gold-report-2/
-
- Vagg T, Shanthikumar S, Ibrahim H, O'Regan P, Chapman WW, Kirwan L, Ranganathan SC, Plant BJ. Telehealth in cystic fibrosis. A systematic review incorporating a novel scoring system and expert weighting to identify a 'top 10 manuscripts' to inform future best practices implementation. J Cyst Fibros. 2023 Jul;22(4):598–606. doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2023.05.012. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1569-1993(23)00142-X S1569-1993(23)00142-X - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
