Home-based initiatives for acute management of COVID-19 patients needing oxygen: differences across The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic new collaborative-care initiatives were developed for treating and monitoring COVID-19 patients with oxygen at home. Aim was to provide a structured overview focused on differences and similarities of initiatives of acute home-based management in the Netherlands. METHODS: Initiatives were eligible for evaluation if (i) COVID-19 patients received oxygen treatment at home; (ii) patients received structured remote monitoring; (iii) it was not an 'early hospital discharge' program; (iv) at least one patient was included. Protocols were screened, and additional information was obtained from involved physicians. Design choices were categorised into: eligible patient group, organization medical care, remote monitoring, nursing care, and devices used. RESULTS: Nine initiatives were screened for eligibility; five were included. Three initiatives included low-risk patients and two were designed specifically for frail patients. Emergency department (ED) visit for an initial diagnostic work-up and evaluation was mandatory in three initiatives before starting home management. Medical responsibility was either assigned to the general practitioner or hospital specialist, most often pulmonologist or internist. Pulse-oximetry was used in all initiatives, with additional monitoring of heart rate and respiratory rate in three initiatives. Remote monitoring staff's qualification and authority varied, and organization and logistics were covered by persons with various backgrounds. All initiatives offered remote monitoring via an application, two also offered a paper diary option. CONCLUSIONS: We observed differences in the organization of interprofessional collaboration for acute home management of hypoxemic COVID-19 patients. All initiatives used pulse-oximetry and an app for remote monitoring. Our overview may be of help to healthcare providers and organizations to set up and implement similar acute home management initiatives for critical episodes of COVID-19 (or other acute disorders) that would otherwise require hospital care.

Home-based management of hypoxaemic COVID-19 patients: design of the Therapy@Home pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital capacity was strained. Home-based care could relieve the hospital care system and improve patient well-being if safely organised.We designed an intervention embedded in a regional collaborative healthcare network for the home-based management of acutely ill COVID-19 patients requiring oxygen treatment. Here, we describe the design and pilot protocol for the evaluation of the feasibility of this complex intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Following a participatory action research approach, the intervention was designed in four consecutive steps: (1) literature review and establishment of an expert panel; (2) concept design of essential intervention building blocks (acute medical care, acute nursing care, remote monitoring, equipment and technology, organisation and logistics); (3) safety assessments (prospective risk analysis and a simulation patient evaluation) and (4) description of the design of the pilot (feasibility) study aimed at including approximately 15-30 patients, sufficient for fine-tuning for a large-scale randomised intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All patients will provide written, informed consent. The study was approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands (protocol NL77421.041.21). The preparatory steps (1-4) needed to perform the pilot are executed and described in this paper. The findings of the pilot will be published in academic journals. If we consider the complex intervention feasible, we aim to continue with a large-scale randomised controlled study evaluating the clinical effectiveness, safety and implementation of the complex intervention.

Patients' and GPs' views and expectations of home monitoring with a pulse oximeter: a mixed-methods process evaluation of a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Research on how home monitoring with a pulse oximeter is executed and experienced by patients with an acute illness such as COVID-19 and their GPs is scarce. AIM: To examine the process of structured home monitoring with a pulse oximeter for patients with COVID-19, their caregivers, and their GPs. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a mixed-method process evaluation alongside a pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial. Patients drawn from a general practice setting, with COVID-19, and aged ≥40 years with cardiovascular comorbidities were included. METHOD: Quantitative trial data from 21 intervention group participants (age 63.2 years) were used, plus qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with 15 patients (age 62.9 years), eight informal caregivers, and 10 GPs. RESULTS: Adherence to the intervention was very high; 97.6% of protocolised peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) measurements in the first 14 days until admission to hospital were recorded (677/694, median daily per patient 2.7). Three identified themes from the interviews were: (a) user-friendliness of home monitoring: easy use of the pulse oximeter and patient preference of a three times daily measurement scheme; (b) patient empowerment: pulse oximeter use enhanced patient self-assurance and empowered patients and informal caregivers in disease management; and (c) added value to current clinical decision making. GPs perceived the pulse oximeter as a useful diagnostic tool and did not experience any additional workload. They felt more secure with remote monitoring with a pulse oximeter than only phone-based monitoring, but emphasised the need to keep an overall view on the patient's condition. CONCLUSION: Structured home monitoring by pulse oximetry supports patients and their informal caregivers in managing, and GPs in monitoring, acute COVID-19 disease. It appears suitable for use in acutely ill patients in general practice.

Home monitoring by pulse oximetry of primary care patients with COVID-19: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pulse oximetry as a home or remote monitoring tool accelerated during the pandemic for patients with COVID-19, but evidence on its use is lacking. AIM: To assess the feasibility of home monitoring by pulse oximetry of patients aged ≥40 years with cardiovascular comorbidity and moderate-to-severe COVID-19. DESIGN AND SETTING: A primary care-based, open, pilot randomised controlled trial, with nested process evaluation, was undertaken in the Netherlands. METHOD: From November 2020 to June 2021, eligible patients presenting to one of 14 participating Dutch general practices were randomly allocated to regular measurement of peripheral oxygen saturation (at least three SpO2 measurements per day for 14 days) with a validated pulse oximeter or usual care. RESULTS: All 41 participants (21 intervention, 20 usual care) completed the 45-day follow-up period. Overall, the intervention group performed 97.6% of protocolised measurements; the median daily measurement per participant was 2.7 (interquartile range 1-4). Hypoxemia (SpO2 <94%) was reported in 10 participants (in 52 measurements); of those, six consulted the GP as instructed. Participants reported a high feeling of safety (0-100 visual analogue scale): 71.8 for the intervention group versus 59.8 for the control (P = 0.09). Primary care consultations were similar across groups: 50 for the intervention versus 51 for the control. Eleven visits by 10 participants were made to the emergency department (eight from the intervention group versus three from usual care), of which six participants were hospitalised (five intervention versus one usual care). No participants were admitted to the intensive care unit or died during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Home monitoring of patients with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 by pulse oximetry appeared feasible; adherence was high, patients reported a high feeling of safety, while the number of primary care consultations remained similar to usual care.

Call Characteristics of Patients Suspected of Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) or Stroke During Out-of-Hours Service: A Comparison Between Men and Women.

Background: In the Netherlands, a digital decision support system for telephone triage at out-of-hours services in primary care (OHS-PC) is used. Differences in help-seeking behavior between men and women when transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke is suspected could potentially affect telephone triage and allocation of urgency. Aim: To assess patient and call characteristics and allocated urgencies between women and men who contacted OHS-PC with suspected TIA/stroke. Methods: A cross-sectional study of 1,266 telephone triage recordings of subjects with suspected neurological symptoms calling the OHS-PC between 2014 and 2016. The allocated urgencies were derived from the electronic medical records of the OHS-PC and the final diagnosis from the patient's own general practitioner, including diagnoses based on hospital specialist letters. Results: Five hundred forty-six men (mean age = 67.3 ± 17.1) and 720 women (mean age = 69.6 ± 19.5) were included. TIA/stroke was diagnosed in 294 men (54%) (mean age = 72.3 ± 13.6) and 366 women (51%) (mean age = 78.0 ± 13.8). In both genders, FAST (face-arm-speech test) symptoms were common in TIA/stroke (men 78%, women 82%) but also in no TIA/stroke (men 63%, women 62%). Men with TIA/stroke had shorter call durations than men without TIA/stroke (7.10 vs. 8.20 min, p = 0.001), whereas in women this difference was smaller and not significant (7.41 vs. 7.56 min, p = 0.41). Both genders were allocated high urgency in 75% of the final TIA/stroke cases. Conclusion: Overall, patient and call characteristics are mostly comparable between men and women, and these only modestly assist in identifying TIA/stroke. There were no gender differences in allocated urgencies after telephone triage in patients with TIA/stroke.