Innovations in research and clinical care using patient-generated health data.

Patient-generated health data (PGHD), or health-related data gathered from patients to help address a health concern, are used increasingly in oncology to make regulatory decisions and evaluate quality of care. PGHD include self-reported health and treatment histories, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and biometric sensor data. Advances in wireless technology, smartphones, and the Internet of Things have facilitated new ways to collect PGHD during clinic visits and in daily life. The goal of the current review was to provide an overview of the current clinical, regulatory, technological, and analytic landscape as it relates to PGHD in oncology research and care. The review begins with a rationale for PGHD as described by the US Food and Drug Administration, the Institute of Medicine, and other regulatory and scientific organizations. The evidence base for clinic-based and remote symptom monitoring using PGHD is described, with an emphasis on PROs. An overview is presented of current approaches to digital phenotyping or device-based, real-time assessment of biometric, behavioral, self-report, and performance data. Analytic opportunities regarding PGHD are envisioned in the context of big data and artificial intelligence in medicine. Finally, challenges and solutions for the integration of PGHD into clinical care are presented. The challenges include electronic medical record integration of PROs and biometric data, analysis of large and complex biometric data sets, and potential clinic workflow redesign. In addition, there is currently more limited evidence for the use of biometric data relative to PROs. Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of PGHD make them increasingly likely to be integrated into oncology research and clinical care.

Novel Therapeutic and Program-Based Approaches to Opioid Use Disorders.

Opioid use disorder continues to drive overdose deaths in many countries, including the United States. Illicit fentanyl and its analogues have emerged as key contributors to the complications and mortality associated with opioid use disorder. Medications for opioid use disorder treatment, such as methadone and buprenorphine, are safe and substantially reduce opioid use, infectious complications, and mortality risk, but remain underutilized. Polysubstance use and emerging substances such as xylazine and designer benzodiazepines create additional treatment challenges. Recent clinical and policy innovations in treatment delivery, including telemedicine, bridge clinics, and expanded models for accessing methadone have the potential to increase access to life-saving care for people living with opioid use disorder.

Randomized Evaluation of a Remote Management Program to Improve Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy: The DRIVE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Several SGLT2i (sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors) and GLP1-RA (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists) reduce cardiovascular events and improve kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes; however, utilization remains low despite guideline recommendations. METHODS: A randomized, remote implementation trial in the Mass General Brigham network enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes with increased cardiovascular or kidney risk. Patients eligible for, but not prescribed, SGLT2i or GLP1-RA were randomly assigned to simultaneous virtual patient education with concurrent prescription of SGLT2i or GLP1-RA (ie, Simultaneous) or 2 months of virtual education followed by medication prescription (ie, Education-First) delivered by a multidisciplinary team driven by nonlicensed navigators and clinical pharmacists who prescribed SGLT2i or GLP1-RA using a standardized treatment algorithm. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with prescriptions for either SGLT2i or GLP1-RA by 6 months. RESULTS: Between March 2021 and December 2022, 200 patients were randomized. The mean age was 66.5 years; 36.5% were female, and 22.0% were non-White. Overall, 30.0% had cardiovascular disease, 5.0% had cerebrovascular disease, and 1.5% had both. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was 77.9 mL/(min‧1.73 m2), and mean urine/albumin creatinine ratio was 88.6 mg/g. After 2 months, 69 of 200 (34.5%) patients received a new prescription for either SGLT2i or GLP1-RA: 53.4% of patients in the Simultaneous arm and 8.3% of patients in the Education-First arm (P<0.001). After 6 months, 128 of 200 (64.0%) received a new prescription: 69.8% of patients in the Simultaneous arm and 56.0% of patients in Education-First (P<0.001). Patient self-report of taking SGLT2i or GLP1-RA within 6 months of trial entry was similarly greater in the Simultaneous versus Education-First arm (69 of 116 [59.5%] versus 37 of 84 [44.0%]; P<0.001) Median time to first prescription was 24 (interquartile range [IQR], 13-50) versus 85 days (IQR, 65-106), respectively (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, a remote, team-based program identifies patients with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular or kidney risk, provides virtual education, prescribes SGLT2i or GLP1-RA, and improves guideline-directed medical therapy. These findings support greater utilization of virtual team-based approaches to optimize chronic disease management. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT06046560.

A New Era in Cardiac Rehabilitation Delivery: Research Gaps, Questions, Strategies, and Priorities.

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a guideline-recommended, multidisciplinary program of exercise training, risk factor management, and psychosocial counseling for people with cardiovascular disease (CVD) that is beneficial but underused and with substantial disparities in referral, access, and participation. The emergence of new virtual and remote delivery models has the potential to improve access to and participation in CR and ultimately improve outcomes for people with CVD. Although data suggest that new delivery models for CR have safety and efficacy similar to traditional in-person CR, questions remain regarding which participants are most likely to benefit from these models, how and where such programs should be delivered, and their effect on outcomes in diverse populations. In this review, we describe important gaps in evidence, identify relevant research questions, and propose strategies for addressing them. We highlight 4 research priorities: (1) including diverse populations in all CR research; (2) leveraging implementation methodologies to enhance equitable delivery of CR; (3) clarifying which populations are most likely to benefit from virtual and remote CR; and (4) comparing traditional in-person CR with virtual and remote CR in diverse populations using multicenter studies of important clinical, psychosocial, and cost-effectiveness outcomes that are relevant to patients, caregivers, providers, health systems, and payors. By framing these important questions, we hope to advance toward a goal of delivering high-quality CR to as many people as possible to improve outcomes in those with CVD.

Digital Technologies in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association.

Cardiac rehabilitation has strong evidence of benefit across many cardiovascular conditions but is underused. Even for those patients who participate in cardiac rehabilitation, there is the potential to better support them in improving behaviors known to promote optimal cardiovascular health and in sustaining those behaviors over time. Digital technology has the potential to address many of the challenges of traditional center-based cardiac rehabilitation and to augment care delivery. This American Heart Association science advisory was assembled to guide the development and implementation of digital cardiac rehabilitation interventions that can be translated effectively into clinical care, improve health outcomes, and promote health equity. This advisory thus describes the individual digital components that can be delivered in isolation or as part of a larger cardiac rehabilitation telehealth program and highlights challenges and future directions for digital technology generally and when used in cardiac rehabilitation specifically. It is also intended to provide guidance to researchers reporting digital interventions and clinicians implementing these interventions in practice and to advance a framework for equity-centered digital health in cardiac rehabilitation.

Antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in urgent care: a comparison of in-person and virtual settings.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in virtual versus in-person urgent care within the same health system. METHODS: This is a retrospective study using electronic health record data from Cleveland Clinic Health System. We identified RTI patients via ICD-10 codes and assessed whether the visit resulted in an antibiotic. We described differences in diagnoses and prescribing by type of urgent care (virtual versus in-person.) We used mixed effects logistic regression to model the odds of a patient receiving an antibiotic by urgent care setting. We applied the model first to all physicians and second only to those who saw patients in both settings. RESULTS: There were 69,189 in-person and 19,003 virtual visits. Fifty-eight percent of virtual visits resulted in an antibiotic compared to 43% of in-person visits. Sinusitis diagnoses were more than twice as common in virtual versus in-person care (36% versus 14%) and were associated with high rates of prescribing in both settings (95% in person, 91% virtual). Compared to in-person care, virtual urgent care was positively associated with a prescription (OR:1.64, 95%CI:1.53-1.75). Among visits conducted by 39 physicians who saw patients in both settings, odds of antibiotic prescription in virtual care were 1.71 times higher than in in-person care (95%CI:1.53-1.90). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prescriptions were more common in virtual versus in-person urgent care settings, including among physicians who provided care in both platforms. This appears to be related to the high rate of sinusitis diagnosis in virtual urgent care.

A randomized prospective trial of an ostomy telehealth intervention for cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors with ostomies face complex challenges. This study compared the Ostomy Self-Management Telehealth program (OSMT) versus attention control usual care (UC). METHODS: Three academic centers randomized participants. OSMT group sessions were led by ostomy nurses and peer ostomates (three for ostomates-only, one for support persons, and one review session for both). Surveys at baseline, OSMT completion, and 6 months were primary outcome patient activation (PAM), self-efficacy (SE), City of Hope quality of life-Ostomy (COH-O), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Surveys were scored per guidelines for those completing at least two surveys. Linear mixed effects models were used to select potential covariates for the final model and to test the impact of OSMT within each timeframe. RESULTS: A total of 90 OSMT and 101 UC fulfilled analysis criteria. Arms were well-matched but types of tumors were unevenly distributed (p = .023). The OSMT arm had a nonsignificant improvement in PAM (confidence interval [CI], -3.65 to 5.3]; 4.0 vs. 2.9) at 6 months. There were no significant differences in other surveys. There was a significant OSMT benefit for urinary tumors (four SE domains). Higher OSMT session attendance was associated with post-session improvements in five SE domains (p < .05), two COH-O domains (p < .05), and HADS anxiety (p = .01). At 6 months, there remained improvements in one SE domain (p < .05), one COH-O domain (p < .05), and HADS anxiety (p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: No clear benefit was seen for the OSMT intervention, although there may be an advantage based on type of tumor. Benefit with greater session attendance was also encouraging. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Cancer patients with ostomies have many challenges. We tested a telehealth curriculum compared to usual care. There are indications of benefit for the program for those that attend more sessions and those with urostomies.

Impact of an automated, remote monitoring and coaching intervention in reducing hospice cancer family caregiving burden: A multisite randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Care for those with life-limiting cancer heavily involves family caregivers who may experience significant physical and emotional burden. The purpose of this study was to test the impact of Symptom Care at Home (SCH), an automated digital family caregiver coaching intervention, during home hospice, when compared to usual hospice care (UC) on the primary outcome of overall caregiver burden. Secondary outcomes included Caregiver Burden at weeks 1 and 8, Mood and Vitality subscales, overall moderate-to-severe caregiving symptoms, and sixth month spouse/partner bereavement outcomes. METHODS: Using a randomized, multisite, nonblinded controlled trial, 332 cancer family caregivers were enrolled and analyzed (159 SCH vs. 173 UC). Caregivers were primarily White (92%), female (69%), and spouse caregivers (53%). Caregivers provided daily reports on severity levels (0-10 scale) for their anxiety, depressed mood, fatigue, disturbed sleep, and caregiving interference with normal activities. These scores combined constituted the Caregiver Burden primary outcome. Based on reported symptoms, SCH caregivers received automated, tailored coaching about improving their well-being. Reports of moderate-to-severe caregiving symptoms also triggered hospice nurse notification. Secondary outcomes of Mood and Vitality were subcomponents of the Caregiver Burden score. A combined bereavement adjustment tool captured sixth month bereavement. RESULTS: The SCH intervention reduced overall Caregiver Burden compared to UC (p < .001), with a 38% reduction at 8 weeks and a medium-to-large effect size (d = .61). SCH caregivers experienced less (p < .001) disruption in both Mood and Vitality. There were higher levels of moderate-to-severe caregiving symptoms overtime in UC (OR, 2.722). All SCH caregivers benefited regardless of caregiver: sex, caregiver relationship, age, patient diagnosis and family income. SCH spouse/partner caregivers achieved better sixth month bereavement adjustment than UC (p < .007). CONCLUSIONS: The SCH intervention significantly decreased caregiving burden over UC and supports the maintenance of family caregiver mood and vitality throughout caregiving with extended benefit into bereavement.

The association between telemedicine, advance care planning, and unplanned hospitalizations among high-risk patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread implementation of telemedicine, there are limited data regarding its impact on key components of care for patients with incurable or high-risk cancer. For these patients, high-quality care requires detailed conversations regarding treatment priorities (advance care planning) and clinical care to minimize unnecessary acute care (unplanned hospitalizations). Whether telemedicine affects these outcomes relative to in-person clinic visits was examined among patients with cancer at high risk for 6-month mortality. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients with cancer with any tumor type treated at the University of Pennsylvania who were newly identified between April 1 and December 31, 2020, to be at high risk for 6-month mortality via a validated machine learning algorithm. Separate modified Poisson regressions were used to assess the occurrence of advance care planning and unplanned hospitalizations for telemedicine as compared to in-person visits. Additional analyses were done comparing telemedicine type (video or phone) as compared to in-person clinic visits. RESULTS: The occurrence of advance care planning was similar between telemedicine and in-person visits (6.8% vs. 6.0%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.25; 95% CI, 0.92-1.69). In regard to telemedicine subtype, patients exposed to video encounters were modestly more likely to have documented advance care planning in comparison to those seen in person (7.5% vs. 6.0%; aRR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.03-2.11). The 3-month risk for unplanned hospitalization was comparable for telemedicine compared to in-person clinic encounters (21% vs. 18%; aRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.81-1.38). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, care delivered by telemedicine, compared to in-person clinic visits, produced comparable rates of advance care planning conversations without increasing hospitalizations, which suggests that vulnerable patients can be managed safely by telemedicine.

Researcher Experience and Comfort With Telemedicine and Remote Patient Monitoring in Cancer Treatment Trials.

BACKGROUND: Since the onset of COVID-19, oncology practices across the US have integrated telemedicine (TM) and remote patient monitoring (RPM) into routine care and clinical trials. The extent of provider experience and comfort with TM/RPM in treatment trials, however, is unknown. We surveyed oncology researchers to assess experience and comfort with TM/RPM. METHODS: Between April 10 and June 1, 2022, we distributed email surveys to US-based members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) whose member records indicated interest or specialization in clinical research. We collected respondent demographic data, clinical trial experience, workplace characteristics, and comfort and experience with TM/RPM use across trial components in phase I and phase II/III trials. TM/RPM was defined as clinical trial-related healthcare and monitoring for patients geographically separated from trial site. RESULTS: There were 141 surveys analyzed (5.1% response rate). Ninety percent of respondents had been Principal Investigators, 98% practiced in a norural site. Most respondents had enrolled patients in phase I (82%) and phase II/III trials (99%). Across all phases and trial components, there was a higher frequency of researcher comfort compared to experience. Regarding remote care in treatment trials, 75% reported using TM, RPM, or both. Among these individuals, 62% had never provided remote care to trial patients before the pandemic. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 spurred the rise of TM/RPM in cancer treatment trials, and some TM/RPM use continues in this context. Among oncology researchers, higher levels of comfort compared with real-world experience with TM/RPM reveal opportunities for expanding TM/RPM policies and guidelines in oncology research.

The Perceived Usability of Virtual Visits Among Black Adults' Receiving Oncology Care: A Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: With the COVID-19 pandemic came rapid uptake in virtual oncology care. During this, sociodemographic inequities in access to virtual visits (VVs) have become apparent. To better understand these issues, we conducted a qualitative study to describe the perceived usability and acceptability of VVs among Black adults diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: Adults who self-identified as Black and had a diagnosis of prostate, multiple myeloma, or head and neck cancer were recruited from 2 academic medical centers, and their community affiliates to participate in a semi-structured interview, regardless of prior VV experience. A patient and family advisory board was formed to inform all components of the study. Interviews were conducted between September 2, 2021 and February 23, 2022. Transcripts were organized topically, and themes and subthemes were determined through iterative and interpretive immersion/crystallization cycles. RESULTS: Of the 49 adults interviewed, 29 (59%) had participated in at least one VV. Three overarching themes were derived: (1) VVs felt comfortable and convenient in the right contexts; (2) the technology required for VVs with video presented new challenges, which were often resolved by an audio-only telephone call; and (3) participants reported preferring in-person visits, citing concerns regarding gaps in nonverbal communication, trusting providers, and distractions during VV. CONCLUSION: While VVs were reported to be acceptable in specific circumstances, Black adults reported preferring in-person care, in part due to a perceived lack of interpersonal connectedness. Nonetheless, retaining reimbursement for audio-only options for VVs is essential to ensure equitable access for those with less technology savvy and/or limited device/internet capabilities.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Telemedicine in Gastroenterology: Commentary.

DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update (CPU) is to review the available evidence and provide expert advice regarding best practices for use of telemedicine in gastroenterology and hepatology. METHODS: This CPU was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This expert commentary incorporates important, as well as recently published, studies in this field, and it reflects the experiences of the authors who are active gastroenterologists and hepatologists with extensive experience using telemedicine in clinical practice.

The IBD Clinic of Tomorrow: Holistic, Patient-Centric, and Value-based Care.

There is increasing recognition of the associated bi-directional impact of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on patient well-being and the potential benefit of multidisciplinary teams to address these unique needs. At certain IBD centers, there has been an evolution towards patient-centric, holistic care to enhance well-being and improve health-related outcomes. Multiple models, incorporating various disciplines, care modalities, digital tools and care delivery, and resource support have arisen in IBD. Although most IBD centers of excellence are now incorporating such multidisciplinary care models, many practices still practice IBD-limited specialty care, limiting evaluations and interventions to the IBD itself and its direct consequences (eg, extraintestinal manifestations). In this piece, we seek to review the evolution of IBD care towards a patient-centric, holistic model (termed 360 IBD Care) including the role and impact of digital health tools, monitoring, and delivery in IBD, and a shift towards value-based care models with discussion of payor priorities in IBD. We also suggest potential opportunities for IBD practitioners to incorporate elements of holistic care on a local scale. Together, we hope such care models will enhance not only IBD-specific health outcomes, but also improve the general well-being of our patients with IBD today and tomorrow.

Inpatient-level care at home delivered by virtual wards and hospital at home: a systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions and their components.

BACKGROUND: Technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home services, such as virtual wards and hospital at home, are being rapidly implemented. This is the first systematic review to link the components of these service delivery innovations to evidence of effectiveness to explore implications for practice and research. METHODS: For this review (registered here https://osf.io/je39y ), we searched Cochrane-recommended multiple databases up to 30 November 2022 and additional resources for randomised and non-randomised studies that compared technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home with hospital-based inpatient care. We classified interventions into care model groups using three key components: clinical activities, workforce, and technology. We synthesised evidence by these groups quantitatively or narratively for mortality, hospital readmissions, cost-effectiveness and length of stay. RESULTS: We include 69 studies: 38 randomised studies (6413 participants; largely judged as low or unclear risk of bias) and 31 non-randomised studies (31,950 participants; largely judged at serious or critical risk of bias). The 69 studies described 63 interventions which formed eight model groups. Most models, regardless of using low- or high-intensity technology, may have similar or reduced hospital readmission risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low-certainty evidence from randomised trials). For mortality, most models had uncertain or unavailable evidence. Two exceptions were low technology-enabled models that involve hospital- and community-based professionals, they may have similar mortality risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low- or moderate-certainty evidence from randomised trials). Cost-effectiveness evidence is unavailable for high technology-enabled models, but sparse evidence suggests the low technology-enabled multidisciplinary care delivered by hospital-based teams appears more cost-effective than hospital-based care for those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence suggests that none of technology-enabled care at home models we explored put people at higher risk of readmission compared with hospital-based care. Where limited evidence on mortality is available, there appears to be no additional risk of mortality due to use of technology-enabled at home models. It is unclear whether inpatient-level care at home using higher levels of technology confers additional benefits. Further research should focus on clearly defined interventions in high-priority populations and include comparative cost-effectiveness evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/je39y .

Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Health Interventions for Asthma or COPD: Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Digital interventions such as remote monitoring of symptoms and physiological measurements have the potential to reduce the economic burden of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but their cost-effectiveness remains unclear. This systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) aims to assess whether digital health interventions can be cost-effective in these patients. DESIGN: Systematic review of RCTs. Study quality was assessed using RoB2 tool. DATA SOURCES: Systematic search in three databases: PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were eligible if they were RCTs with health economic evaluations assessing participants with asthma and/or COPD and comparing a digital health intervention to standard of care. RESULTS: We included 35 RCTs, of which 21 were related to COPD, 13 to asthma and one to both diseases. Overall, studies assessed four categories of digital health interventions: (i) Electronic patient diaries (n = 4), (ii) real-time monitoring (n = 19), (iii) teleconsultations (n = 6) and (iv) others (n = 6). Eleven studies performed a full economic evaluation analysis, while 24 studies performed a partial economic analysis. Most studies involving real-time monitoring or teleconsultations presented economic results in favour of digital health interventions (indicating them to be cost-effective or less expensive than the standard of care). Mixed results were obtained for electronic patient diaries. In the studies that conducted a full economic analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) ranged from 3530,93€/QALY and 286,369,28€/QALY. In the studies that conducted a partial economic analysis, the cost differences between the intervention group and the control group ranged from 0,12€ and 85,217,86€. Half studies with low risk of bias concluded that the intervention was economically favourable. CONCLUSION: Although costs varied based on intervention type, follow-up period and country, most studies report digital health interventions to be affordable or associated with decreased costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42023439195.

Interstate Telemedicine for Urologic Cancer Care.

PURPOSE: US states eased licensing restrictions on telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing interstate use. As waivers expire, optimal uses of telemedicine must be assessed to inform policy, legislation, and clinical care. We assessed whether telemedicine visits provided the same patient experience as in-person visits, stratified by in- vs out-of-state residence, and examined the financial burden. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients seen in person and via telemedicine for urologic cancer care at a major regional cancer center received a survey after their first appointment (August 2019-June 2022) on satisfaction with care, perceptions of communication during their visit, travel time, travel costs, and days of work missed. RESULTS: Surveys were completed for 1058 patient visits (N = 178 in-person, N = 880 telemedicine). Satisfaction rates were high for all visit types, both interstate and in-state care (mean score 60.1-60.8 [maximum 63], P > .05). More patients convening interstate telemedicine would repeat that modality (71%) than interstate in-person care (61%) or in-state telemedicine (57%). Patients receiving interstate care had significantly higher travel costs (median estimated visit costs $200, IQR $0-$800 vs median $0, IQR $0-$20 for in-state care, P < .001); 55% of patients receiving interstate in-person care required plane travel and 60% required a hotel stay. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine appointments may increase access for rural-residing patients with cancer. Satisfaction outcomes among patients with urologic cancer receiving interstate care were similar to those of patients cared for in state; costs were markedly lower. Extending interstate exemptions beyond COVID-19 licensing waivers would permit continued delivery of high-quality urologic cancer care to rural-residing patients.

An Economic Evaluation of a Web-Based Management Support System for Children With Urinary Incontinence: The eADVICE Trial.

PURPOSE: Children who require specialist outpatient care typically wait substantial periods during which their condition may progress, making treatment more difficult and costly. Timely and effective therapy during this period may reduce the need for lengthy specialist care. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of an individualized, evidence-informed, web-based program for children with urinary incontinence awaiting a specialist appointment (Electronic Advice and Diagnosis Via the Internet following Computerized Evaluation [eADVICE]) compared to usual care. eADVICE was supervised by a primary physician and delivered by an embodied conversational agent. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the perspective of the health care funder as a substudy of eADVICE, a multicenter, waitlist-controlled, randomized trial. Outcomes measures were incremental cost per incremental change in continence status and quality of life on an intention-to-treat basis. Uncertainty was examined using cost-effectiveness planes, scenarios, and 1-way sensitivity analyses. Costs were valued in 2021 Australian dollars. RESULTS: The use of eADVICE was found to be cost saving and beneficial (dominant) over usual care, with a higher proportion of children dry over 14 days at 6 months (risk difference 0.13; 95%CI 0.02-0.23, P = .03) and mean health care costs reduced by $188 (95%CI $61-$315) per participant. CONCLUSIONS: An individualized, evidence-informed, web-based program delivered by an embodied conversational agent is likely cost saving for children with urinary incontinence awaiting a specialist appointment. The potential economic impact of such a program is favorable and substantial, and may be transferable to outpatient clinic settings for other chronic health conditions.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Web-Based Management Support System for Children With Urinary Incontinence: The eADVICE Trial.

PURPOSE: Children referred to specialist outpatient clinics by primary care providers often have long waiting times before being seen. We assessed whether an individualized, web-based, evidence-informed management support for children with urinary incontinence while waiting reduced requests for specialist appointments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicenter, waitlisted randomized controlled trial was conducted for children (5-18 years) with urinary incontinence referred to tertiary pediatric continence clinics. Participants were randomized to the web-based eHealth program electronic Advice and Diagnosis Via the Internet following Computerized Evaluation (eADVICE), which used an embodied conversational agent to engage with the child at the time of referral (intervention) or 6 months later (control). The primary outcome was the proportion of participants requesting a clinic appointment at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included persistent incontinence, and the Paediatric incontinence Questionnaire (PinQ) score. RESULTS: From 2018 to 2020, 239 children enrolled, with 120 randomized to eADVICE and 119 to the control arm. At baseline, participants' mean age was 8.8 years (SD 2.2), 62% were males, mean PinQ score was 5.3 (SD 2.2), 36% had daytime incontinence, and 97% had nocturnal enuresis. At 6 months, 78% of eADVICE participants vs 84% of controls requested a clinic visit (relative risk 0.92, 95% CI 0.79, 1.06, P = .3), and 23% eADVICE participants vs 10% controls were completely dry (relative risk 2.23, 95% CI 1.10, 4.50, P = .03). The adjusted mean PinQ score was 3.5 for eADVICE and 3.9 for controls (MD -0.37, 95% CI -0.71, -0.03, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The eADVICE eHealth program for children awaiting specialist appointments doubled the proportion who were dry at 6 months and improved quality of life but did not reduce clinic appointment requests.

Telemedicine in HIV health care during the COVID-19 pandemic: An implementation research study in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

BACKGROUND: From October 2020 to October 2022, we conducted an implementation study to offer telemedicine (TM) across four HIV units of general public hospitals in Buenos Aires. The intervention used TM to provide a continuum of care to patients with HIV. METHODS AND SETTING: We used the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the strategy. The study started during a COVID-19 outbreak with strict lockdown policies and continued until return to normal practices. Implementation facilitation served as the core implementation strategy. RESULTS: We reached 4118 patients (58% of eligible individuals), and the main perceived benefits were the ability to avoid exposure to infectious diseases and reduced travel time and cost. After a median of 515 days of follow-up, 95.7% of participants with HIV were receiving antiretroviral therapy, and 87.8% were virally suppressed, with a median CD4+ count of 648 cells/µL. In total, 36.6% reported clinical events, and 20.4% presented with COVID-19 infection. The proportion of physicians adopting TM was 69.37%. After enrolment, 2406 of 5640 (43%) follow-up visits were conducted via TM. By the end of the study, 26.29% of appointments offered in the four centres were through TM, whereas 73.71% were in-person appointments. CONCLUSION: It was feasible to implement TM in the four centres in the public health sector in Buenos Aires, Argentina. It was acceptable for both patients and healthcare workers, and effectively reached a large proportion of the population served in these clinics. Both healthcare workers and patients consider it a model of care that will continue to be offered in the future.

Effect of the Telemedicine Enhanced Asthma Management Through the Emergency Department (TEAM-ED) Program on Asthma Morbidity: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a telemedicine-based program in reducing asthma morbidity among children who present to the emergency department (ED) for asthma, by facilitating primary care follow-up and promoting delivery of guideline-based care. STUDY DESIGN: We included children (3-12 years of age) with persistent asthma who presented to the ED for asthma, who were then randomly assigned to Telemedicine Enhanced Asthma Management through the Emergency Department (TEAM-ED) or enhanced usual care. TEAM-ED included (1) school-based telemedicine follow-ups, completed by a primary care provider, (2) point-of-care prompting to promote guideline-based care, and 3) an opportunity for 2 additional telemedicine follow-ups. The primary outcome was the mean number of symptom-free days (SFDs) over 2 weeks at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. RESULTS: We included 373 children from 2016 through 2021 (participation rate 68%; 54% Black, 32% Hispanic, 77% public insurance; mean age, 6.4 years). Demographic characteristics and asthma severity were similar between groups at baseline. Most (91%) TEAM-ED children had ≥1 telemedicine visit and 41% completed 3 visits. At 3 months, caregivers of children in TEAM-ED reported more follow-up visits (66% vs 48%; aOR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.28-3.33), preventive asthma medication actions (90% vs 79%; aOR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.56-6.89), and use of a preventive medication (82% vs 69%; aOR, 2.716; 95% CI, 1.45-5.08), compared with enhanced usual care. There was no difference between groups in medication adherence or asthma morbidity. When only prepandemic data were included, there was greater improvement in SFDs over time for children in TEAM-ED vs enhanced usual care. CONCLUSIONS: TEAM-ED significantly improved follow-up and preventive care after an ED visit for asthma. We also saw improved SFDs with prepandemic data. The lack of overall improvement in morbidity and adherence indicates the need for additional ongoing management support. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02752165.