R.Gentry Wilkerson, Youssef Annous, Eli Farhy, Jonathan Hurst, Angela D. Smedley
{"title":"Home pulse oximetry monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic: An assessment of patient engagement and compliance","authors":"R.Gentry Wilkerson, Youssef Annous, Eli Farhy, Jonathan Hurst, Angela D. Smedley","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2023.100776","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Patients with suspected COVID-19 remain at risk for clinical deterioration after discharge and may benefit from home oxygen saturation (SpO<sub>2</sub>) monitoring using portable pulse oximeter devices. Our study aims to evaluate patient engagement and compliance with a home SpO<sub>2</sub> monitoring program.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a single center, prospective pilot study of patients being discharged from the ED or urgent care after evaluation of symptoms consistent with COVID-19. Subjects were given a portable pulse oximeter and instructed to obtain measurements at rest and with exertion twice daily for 14 days. Patients were contacted daily to collect recorded data. If attempts to contact the patient were unsuccessful for 3 consecutive days, patients were considered lost to follow up. The primary outcome of interest was patient engagement in the program which was defined as the percentage of patients that completed the 14-day study period, meaning they were not lost to follow up. Secondary outcomes included compliance with performing the SpO<sub>2</sub> readings. Patient compliance was calculated as a percentage of completed readings out of the total expected readings.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty patients were enrolled - 2 withdrew and 1 was a screen failure. Overall, engagement in the program was 46.8% with no significant difference between those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 versus those who tested negative (48.2% vs 45%, <em>p</em> = 0.831). Median compliance overall was 42.9% (IQR 22.22–78.57). Median compliance for the positive group was 50.0% (IQR 20–85.71) and 42.86% (IQR 22.92–76.44) for the negative group (<em>p</em> = 0.838).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our study demonstrated that there was acceptable engagement and compliance in a 14-day home SpO<sub>2</sub> monitoring program. These results support the use of home pulse oximetry monitoring in a select group of mildly ill patients with suspected COVID-19.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883723000527","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
Patients with suspected COVID-19 remain at risk for clinical deterioration after discharge and may benefit from home oxygen saturation (SpO2) monitoring using portable pulse oximeter devices. Our study aims to evaluate patient engagement and compliance with a home SpO2 monitoring program.
Methods
This is a single center, prospective pilot study of patients being discharged from the ED or urgent care after evaluation of symptoms consistent with COVID-19. Subjects were given a portable pulse oximeter and instructed to obtain measurements at rest and with exertion twice daily for 14 days. Patients were contacted daily to collect recorded data. If attempts to contact the patient were unsuccessful for 3 consecutive days, patients were considered lost to follow up. The primary outcome of interest was patient engagement in the program which was defined as the percentage of patients that completed the 14-day study period, meaning they were not lost to follow up. Secondary outcomes included compliance with performing the SpO2 readings. Patient compliance was calculated as a percentage of completed readings out of the total expected readings.
Results
Fifty patients were enrolled - 2 withdrew and 1 was a screen failure. Overall, engagement in the program was 46.8% with no significant difference between those who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 versus those who tested negative (48.2% vs 45%, p = 0.831). Median compliance overall was 42.9% (IQR 22.22–78.57). Median compliance for the positive group was 50.0% (IQR 20–85.71) and 42.86% (IQR 22.92–76.44) for the negative group (p = 0.838).
Conclusion
Our study demonstrated that there was acceptable engagement and compliance in a 14-day home SpO2 monitoring program. These results support the use of home pulse oximetry monitoring in a select group of mildly ill patients with suspected COVID-19.
期刊介绍:
Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments.
HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology.
Topics covered by HPT will include:
- Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems
- Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches
- National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives
- Cross-border eHealth including health tourism
- The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare
- Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies
- Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies
- Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making
- Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in)
- Regulation and health economics