Telehealth-Enabled Transitional Care Across Inpatient-to-Outpatient Settings in Patients with Diabetes: A Scoping Review.

IF 2
Donghwan Lee, Lisvel Matos, Sarah Cantrell, Matthew J Crowley, Ryan J Shaw
{"title":"Telehealth-Enabled Transitional Care Across Inpatient-to-Outpatient Settings in Patients with Diabetes: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Donghwan Lee, Lisvel Matos, Sarah Cantrell, Matthew J Crowley, Ryan J Shaw","doi":"10.1177/15305627261490004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The inpatient-to-outpatient transition is a critical and vulnerable period for patients with diabetes, frequently marked by fragmented communication, incomplete follow-up, and preventable readmissions. Telehealth has emerged as a promising approach to bridge this gap; however, the design and implementation of telehealth-enabled transitional care models have not been systematically characterized.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This scoping review aimed to map existing evidence on telehealth-enabled transitional care for patients with diabetes; characterize intervention components, modalities, and target populations; and summarize reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science were searched. Eligible studies included empirical research and published protocols reporting telehealth interventions initiated during hospitalization or at discharge and continuing into outpatient or home settings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty studies published between 2014 and 2025 were included. Telephone-based follow-up was the most frequently used modality, appearing in 17 of 20 studies. Nurses and nurse practitioners were the most commonly identified providers. Glycemic outcomes were more consistently improved than hospital readmission rates: 7 out of 13 studies reported significant glycated hemoglobin reductions compared with 3 out of 14 studies reporting significant readmission reductions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Provider role and the social and structural context of care delivery emerged as important considerations for both clinical practice and research. Key gaps include lack of consensus on appropriate transitional duration, limited provider continuity description, limited cost-effectiveness evidence, underrepresentation of type 1 diabetes, and insufficient attention to health equity.</p>","PeriodicalId":520784,"journal":{"name":"Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association","volume":" ","pages":"15305627261490004"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15305627261490004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The inpatient-to-outpatient transition is a critical and vulnerable period for patients with diabetes, frequently marked by fragmented communication, incomplete follow-up, and preventable readmissions. Telehealth has emerged as a promising approach to bridge this gap; however, the design and implementation of telehealth-enabled transitional care models have not been systematically characterized.

Objective: This scoping review aimed to map existing evidence on telehealth-enabled transitional care for patients with diabetes; characterize intervention components, modalities, and target populations; and summarize reported outcomes.

Methods: Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines, MEDLINE, CINAHL Complete, and Web of Science were searched. Eligible studies included empirical research and published protocols reporting telehealth interventions initiated during hospitalization or at discharge and continuing into outpatient or home settings.

Results: Twenty studies published between 2014 and 2025 were included. Telephone-based follow-up was the most frequently used modality, appearing in 17 of 20 studies. Nurses and nurse practitioners were the most commonly identified providers. Glycemic outcomes were more consistently improved than hospital readmission rates: 7 out of 13 studies reported significant glycated hemoglobin reductions compared with 3 out of 14 studies reporting significant readmission reductions.

Conclusions: Provider role and the social and structural context of care delivery emerged as important considerations for both clinical practice and research. Key gaps include lack of consensus on appropriate transitional duration, limited provider continuity description, limited cost-effectiveness evidence, underrepresentation of type 1 diabetes, and insufficient attention to health equity.

糖尿病患者从住院到门诊的远程医疗过渡护理:范围综述
背景:糖尿病患者从住院到门诊的过渡是一个关键和脆弱的时期,通常以沟通不完整、随访不完整和可预防的再入院为特征。远程保健已成为弥合这一差距的一种有希望的办法;然而,远程医疗过渡护理模式的设计和实施还没有系统的特征。目的:本综述旨在绘制糖尿病患者远程医疗过渡护理的现有证据;描述干预成分、方式和目标人群;总结报告的结果。方法:按照Joanna Briggs研究所的方法和首选报告项目进行系统评价和meta分析扩展的范围评价指南,检索MEDLINE、CINAHL Complete和Web of Science。符合条件的研究包括经验研究和已发表的协议,报告在住院或出院时开始的远程保健干预措施,并继续进入门诊或家庭环境。结果:纳入了2014年至2025年间发表的20项研究。电话随访是最常用的方式,在20项研究中出现了17项。护士和执业护士是最常见的提供者。与再入院率相比,血糖结果的改善更为一致:13项研究中有7项报告了显著的糖化血红蛋白降低,而14项研究中有3项报告了显著的再入院率降低。结论:在临床实践和研究中,提供者的角色和护理提供的社会和结构背景成为重要的考虑因素。主要的差距包括对适当的过渡时间缺乏共识,提供者连续性描述有限,成本效益证据有限,1型糖尿病代表性不足,以及对卫生公平的重视不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书