OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the effects of telemedicine on asthma control and the quality of life in adults.
METHODS: An electronic search was performed from the inception to March 2018 on the following databases: Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, EMBASE, PubMed, and Scopus. Randomized controlled trials that assessed the effects of telemedicine in adults with asthma were included in this analysis, and the outcomes of interest were levels of asthma control and quality of life. Random-effects model meta-analyses were performed.
RESULTS: A total of 22 studies (10,281 participants) were included. Each of 11 studies investigated the effects of single-telemedicine and combined-telemedicine (combinations of telemedicine approaches), and the meta-analyses showed that combined tele-case management could significantly improve asthma control compared with usual care (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56, 1.01). Combined tele-case management and tele-consultation (SMD = 0.52 [95% CI: 0.13, 0.91]) and combined tele-consultation (SMD = 0.28 [95% CI: 0.13, 0.44]) also significantly improved asthma outcomes, but to a lesser degree. In addition, combined tele-case management (SMD = 0.59 [95% CI: 0.31, 0.88]) was the most effective telemedicine for improving quality of life, followed by combined tele-case management and tele-consultation (SMD = 0.31 [95% CI: 0.03, 0.59]), tele-case management (SMD = 0.30 [95% CI: 0.05, 0.55]), and combined tele-consultation (SMD = 0.27 [95% CI: 0.11, 0.43]), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Combined-telemedicine involving tele-case management or tele-consultation appear to be effective telemedicine interventions to improve asthma control and quality of life in adults. Our findings are expected to provide health care professionals with current evidence of the effects of telemedicine on asthma control and patients' quality of life.
METHODS: An activity-based microcosting approach was applied to estimate the unit cost of events from the hospital's perspective. First, activities and resources that were involved in each cost center were identified and valued against a suitable form of unit. Thereafter, the mean cost of each resource per event was calculated by dividing the product of the quantity of the resource used and the unit cost of the resource by the number of events. The mean cost per event was the sum of the cost of resources for all cost centers involved. The costs were expressed in 2014 US dollars ($) and Malaysian Ringgit (RM).
RESULTS: Data were collected from 15 maintenance, 20 acute exacerbation, and 50 hospitalization events. The mean (±SD) cost of maintenance management was $48.04 (±10.10); RM154.68 (±32.52). The cost of acute exacerbation management in the Emergency Department was $13.50 (±2.21), RM43.46 (±7.10); and in the medical ward, the cost was $552.13 (±303.41), RM1777.86 (±976.98), per hospitalization event.
CONCLUSION: The microcosting of management of asthma-related events provides more accurate estimates that could be used in local economic studies. However, its possible limited generalizability to other types of health care settings in Malaysia needs to be kept in mind.
Methods: Following Cochrane methodology, we searched ten databases (January 1990 - June 2018; updated October 2019), without language restriction. We included controlled experimental studies whose interventions targeted health literacy to improve asthma self-management. Selection of papers, extraction of data and quality assessment were done independently by two reviewers. The primary outcomes were clinical (asthma control) and implementation (adoption/adherence to intervention). Analysis was narrative.
Results: We screened 4318 titles and abstracts, reviewed 52 full-texts and included five trials. One trial was conducted in a LMIC. Risk of bias was low in one trial and high in the other four studies. Clinical outcomes were reported in two trials, both at high risk of bias: one of which reported a reduction in unscheduled care (number of visits in 6-month (SD); Intervention:0.9 (1.2) vs Control:1.8 (2.4), P = 0.001); the other showed no effect. None reported uptake or adherence to the intervention. Behavioural change strategies typically focused on improving an individual's psychological and physical capacity to enact behaviour (eg, targeting asthma-related knowledge or comprehension). Only two interventions also targeted motivation; none sought to improve opportunity. Less than half of the interventions used specific self-management strategies (eg, written asthma action plan) with tailoring to limited health literacy status. Different approaches (eg, video-based and pictorial action plans) were used to provide education.
Conclusions: The paucity of studies and diversity of the interventions to support people with limited health literacy to self-manage their asthma meant that the impact on health outcomes remains unclear. Given the proportion of the global population who have limited health literacy skills, this is a research priority.
Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD 42018118974.