We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Feasibility of personalised remote long-term follow-up of people with cochlear implants: a randomised controlled trial.
BMJ Open 2018 April 21
INTRODUCTION: Substantial resources are required to provide lifelong postoperative care to people with cochlear implants. Most patients visit the clinic annually. We introduced a person-centred remote follow-up pathway, giving patients telemedicine tools to use at home so they would only visit the centre when intervention was required.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of comparing a remote care pathway with the standard pathway in adults using cochlear implants.
DESIGN: Two-arm randomised controlled trial. Randomisation used a minimisation approach, controlling for potential confounding factors. Participant blinding was not possible, but baseline measures occurred before allocation.
SETTING: University of Southampton Auditory Implant Service: provider of National Health Service care.
PARTICIPANTS: 60 adults who had used cochlear implants for at least 6 months.
INTERVENTIONS: Control group (n=30) followed usual care pathway.Remote care group (n=30) received care remotely for 6 months incorporating: home hearing in noise test, online support tool and self-adjustment of device (only 10 had compatible equipment).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: change in patient activation; measured using the Patient Activation Measure.Secondary: change in hearing and quality of life; qualitative feedback from patients and clinicians.
RESULTS: One participant in the remote care group dropped out. The remote care group showed a greater increase in patient activation than the control group. Changes in hearing differed between the groups. The remote care group improved on the Triple Digit Test hearing test; the control group perceived their hearing was worse on the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale questionnaire. Quality of life remained unchanged in both groups. Patients and clinicians were generally positive about remote care tools and wanted to continue.
CONCLUSIONS: Adults with cochlear implants were willing to be randomised and complied with the protocol. Personalised remote care for long-term follow-up is feasible and acceptable, leading to more empowered patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14644286.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of comparing a remote care pathway with the standard pathway in adults using cochlear implants.
DESIGN: Two-arm randomised controlled trial. Randomisation used a minimisation approach, controlling for potential confounding factors. Participant blinding was not possible, but baseline measures occurred before allocation.
SETTING: University of Southampton Auditory Implant Service: provider of National Health Service care.
PARTICIPANTS: 60 adults who had used cochlear implants for at least 6 months.
INTERVENTIONS: Control group (n=30) followed usual care pathway.Remote care group (n=30) received care remotely for 6 months incorporating: home hearing in noise test, online support tool and self-adjustment of device (only 10 had compatible equipment).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: change in patient activation; measured using the Patient Activation Measure.Secondary: change in hearing and quality of life; qualitative feedback from patients and clinicians.
RESULTS: One participant in the remote care group dropped out. The remote care group showed a greater increase in patient activation than the control group. Changes in hearing differed between the groups. The remote care group improved on the Triple Digit Test hearing test; the control group perceived their hearing was worse on the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale questionnaire. Quality of life remained unchanged in both groups. Patients and clinicians were generally positive about remote care tools and wanted to continue.
CONCLUSIONS: Adults with cochlear implants were willing to be randomised and complied with the protocol. Personalised remote care for long-term follow-up is feasible and acceptable, leading to more empowered patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14644286.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app