Effectiveness of Telemonitoring Intervention in Children and Adolescents with Asthma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
10.4040/jkan.2018.48.4.389
- Author:
Youjin JUNG
1
;
Jimin KIM
;
Dong Ah PARK
Author Information
1. National Evidence-Based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, Korea. pda124@neca.re.kr
- Publication Type:Meta-Analysis ; Randomized Controlled Trial ; Review
- Keywords:
Asthma;
Telemedicine;
Review;
Meta-analysis
- MeSH:
Adolescent*;
Asthma*;
Child*;
Humans;
Medication Adherence;
Nursing;
Self Care;
Telemedicine
- From:Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing
2018;48(4):389-406
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of telemonitoring (TM) in the management of children and adolescents with asthma. METHODS: We searched Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and 5 domestic databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through December 2017. Two reviewers independently selected relevant studies, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. We performed a meta-analysis of TM versus usual care and summarized the intervention characteristics of included studies. RESULTS: Of the 3,095 articles identified, 8 RCTs (9 articles) were included in this review. The type of TM intervention of included studies was varying across studies (transmitted data, transmission frequency, data review, etc.). The pooled asthma control score was not significantly different between TM and usual care (standardized mean difference 0.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.20~0.28). Another pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in asthma exacerbation between TM and usual care (odds ratio 0.95, 95% CI 0.43~2.09). Overall, the pooled results from these studies revealed that TM did not lead to clinically significant improvements in health outcomes, but some studies in our analysis suggested that TM increased patient medication adherence and intervention adherence. CONCLUSION: The current evidence base does not demonstrate any differences between TM intervention and usual care, but TM intervention might be considered a promising strategy for the delivery of self-management support for children and adolescents with asthma. Further well-designed studies are needed to assess the effects on clinical outcomes.
