Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Patients' and carers' experiences of, and engagement with remote home monitoring services for COVID-19 patients: a rapid mixed-methods study
Holly Walton; Cecilia Vindrola-Padros; Nadia Crellin; Manbinder S Sidhu; Lauren Herlitz; Ian Litchfield; Jo Ellins; Pei Li Ng; Efthalia Massou; Sonila M Tomini; Naomi J Fulop.
Affiliation
  • Holly Walton; University College London
  • Cecilia Vindrola-Padros; University College London
  • Nadia Crellin; Nuffield Trust
  • Manbinder S Sidhu; University of Birmingham
  • Lauren Herlitz; University College London
  • Ian Litchfield; University of Birmingham
  • Jo Ellins; University of Birmingham
  • Pei Li Ng; University College London
  • Efthalia Massou; University of Cambridge
  • Sonila M Tomini; University College London
  • Naomi J Fulop; University College London
Preprint in En | PREPRINT-MEDRXIV | ID: ppmedrxiv-21267968
ABSTRACT
IntroductionRemote home monitoring models were implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic to shorten hospital length of stay, reduce unnecessary hospital admission, readmission and infection, and appropriately escalate care. Within these models, patients are asked to take and record readings and escalate care if advised. There is limited evidence on how patients and carers experience these services. This study aimed to evaluate patient experiences of, and engagement with, remote home monitoring models for COVID-19. MethodsA rapid mixed-methods study in England. We conducted a cross-sectional survey and interviews with patients and carers. Interview findings were summarised using rapid assessment procedures sheets and grouping data into themes (using thematic analysis). Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics. ResultsWe received 1069 surveys (18% response rate) and conducted interviews with patients (n=59) and carers (n=3). Care relied on support from staff members, and family/friends. Patients and carers reported positive experiences and felt that the service and human contact reassured them and was easy to engage with. Yet, some patients and carers identified problems with engagement. Engagement was influenced by patient factors such as health and knowledge, support from family/friends and staff, availability and ease-of-use of informational and material resources (e.g. equipment), and service factors. ConclusionRemote home monitoring models place responsibility on patients to self-manage symptoms in partnership with staff; yet many patients required support and preferred human contact (especially for identifying problems). Caring burden and experiences of those living alone, and barriers to engagement should be considered when designing and implementing remote home monitoring services. Patient or public contributionFor this evaluation, members of the study team met with service user and public members of the BRACE PPI group and Health and Care Panel and patient representatives from RSET in a series of workshops. These workshops informed study design, data collection tools, data interpretation and to discuss study dissemination for Phase 2. For example, patient facing documents, such as the consent form, topic guides, patient survey and patient information sheet were reviewed by this group. Additionally, PPI members helped to pilot patient surveys and interview guides with the research team. We also asked some members of the public to pilot the patient survey. Members of the PPI group were given the opportunity to comment on the manuscript. One PPI member commented on the manuscript and the manuscript was amended accordingly.
License
cc_by_nc
Full text: 1 Collection: 09-preprints Database: PREPRINT-MEDRXIV Type of study: Experimental_studies / Observational_studies / Qualitative_research / Rct Language: En Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint
Full text: 1 Collection: 09-preprints Database: PREPRINT-MEDRXIV Type of study: Experimental_studies / Observational_studies / Qualitative_research / Rct Language: En Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint