P198肺移植术后家庭肺活量测定的服务评价

Bhn Chow, K. Iyer, G. Ridings, L. Webster, H. Clowes, K. Santhanakrishnan, J. Blaikley
{"title":"P198肺移植术后家庭肺活量测定的服务评价","authors":"Bhn Chow, K. Iyer, G. Ridings, L. Webster, H. Clowes, K. Santhanakrishnan, J. Blaikley","doi":"10.1136/thorax-2022-btsabstracts.332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction and ObjectivesFollowing Lung Transplantation recipients perform regular spirometry to assess allograft function. Due to infection risks during the COVID pandemic, this was difficult to perform when vulnerable immunosuppressed patients were shielding. Therefore, we provided our patients with home spirometry allowing them to be perform spirometry remotely.MethodsBluetooth spirobank spirometers and an app created by patientMpower to transmit the data were given to 164 lung transplant patients. The service was then evaluated by comparing results from the device against recent (>3 months) spirometry performed at the hospital. The views of clinicians and patients were also obtained about the service through questionnaires.Results164 patients were provided with home spirometers, 112 questionnaires were collected from clinicians following patient consultations and 94 patients were interviewed for their experience. Nearly a quarter of patients (23%) reported difficulties with the spirometer’s initial setting up or using the smartphone app.The FEV1 and FVC readings from home spirometry correlated well with measurements taken in clinic with an R2 of 0.69 and 0.59 respectively (p<0.01 n=78). Clinicians found home spirometry useful in 79.6% (n=112) of consultations and felt the need for hospital spirometry was removed in 63% of cases.Patients were asked to perform spirometry daily or once a week after lung transplantation depending on when they had their transplant. 50% of patients met this goal submitting readings at least three times per week. The median patient rating of the program was 9 out of 10 (10= excellent, n=91). Patient evaluations indicated that the spirometer was easy to use (91.4%), compact (86.0%), and the app was helpful (71.0%) (n=94). In comparison to the previous analogue spirometer, 88.4% of respondents preferred the new Bluetooth spirometer (n=73).ConclusionWe found Bluetooth home spirometer provided accurate results, which was useful in the clinical setting and is acceptable to patients. In addition, it provided real time remote monitoring aiding in assessment of allograft function, which was a benefit over the analogue counterpart particularly during COVID.","PeriodicalId":394485,"journal":{"name":"‘WALL-E’ – The future of digital healthcare delivery","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"P198 Service evaluation of home spirometry following lung transplantation\",\"authors\":\"Bhn Chow, K. Iyer, G. Ridings, L. Webster, H. Clowes, K. Santhanakrishnan, J. Blaikley\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/thorax-2022-btsabstracts.332\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction and ObjectivesFollowing Lung Transplantation recipients perform regular spirometry to assess allograft function. Due to infection risks during the COVID pandemic, this was difficult to perform when vulnerable immunosuppressed patients were shielding. Therefore, we provided our patients with home spirometry allowing them to be perform spirometry remotely.MethodsBluetooth spirobank spirometers and an app created by patientMpower to transmit the data were given to 164 lung transplant patients. The service was then evaluated by comparing results from the device against recent (>3 months) spirometry performed at the hospital. The views of clinicians and patients were also obtained about the service through questionnaires.Results164 patients were provided with home spirometers, 112 questionnaires were collected from clinicians following patient consultations and 94 patients were interviewed for their experience. Nearly a quarter of patients (23%) reported difficulties with the spirometer’s initial setting up or using the smartphone app.The FEV1 and FVC readings from home spirometry correlated well with measurements taken in clinic with an R2 of 0.69 and 0.59 respectively (p<0.01 n=78). Clinicians found home spirometry useful in 79.6% (n=112) of consultations and felt the need for hospital spirometry was removed in 63% of cases.Patients were asked to perform spirometry daily or once a week after lung transplantation depending on when they had their transplant. 50% of patients met this goal submitting readings at least three times per week. The median patient rating of the program was 9 out of 10 (10= excellent, n=91). Patient evaluations indicated that the spirometer was easy to use (91.4%), compact (86.0%), and the app was helpful (71.0%) (n=94). In comparison to the previous analogue spirometer, 88.4% of respondents preferred the new Bluetooth spirometer (n=73).ConclusionWe found Bluetooth home spirometer provided accurate results, which was useful in the clinical setting and is acceptable to patients. In addition, it provided real time remote monitoring aiding in assessment of allograft function, which was a benefit over the analogue counterpart particularly during COVID.\",\"PeriodicalId\":394485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"‘WALL-E’ – The future of digital healthcare delivery\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"‘WALL-E’ – The future of digital healthcare delivery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/thorax-2022-btsabstracts.332\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"‘WALL-E’ – The future of digital healthcare delivery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/thorax-2022-btsabstracts.332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肺移植术后接受者定期进行肺活量测定以评估同种异体移植物的功能。由于COVID大流行期间的感染风险,当脆弱的免疫抑制患者被屏蔽时,很难做到这一点。因此,我们为患者提供家庭肺活量测定仪,使他们能够远程进行肺活量测定。方法对164例肺移植患者使用蓝牙肺活量计和patientMpower开发的数据传输应用程序。然后通过比较该设备的结果与最近在医院进行的(bbb - 3个月)肺活量测定结果来评估该服务。通过问卷调查的方式了解临床医生和患者对服务的看法。结果为164例患者配备了家用肺活量计,通过会诊向临床医生收集问卷112份,对94例患者进行了经验访谈。近四分之一的患者(23%)报告了肺活量计初始设置或使用智能手机应用程序的困难。家庭肺活量计的FEV1和FVC读数与临床测量结果相关良好,R2分别为0.69和0.59 (p<0.01 n=78)。临床医生发现家庭肺活量测定在79.6% (n=112)的咨询中有用,63%的病例认为不需要医院肺活量测定。患者被要求在肺移植后每天或每周进行一次肺活量测定,这取决于他们的移植时间。50%的患者达到了这一目标,每周至少提交三次读数。该项目的中位患者评分为9分(10分=优秀,n=91)。患者评价表明,该呼吸计易于使用(91.4%),紧凑(86.0%),应用程序有帮助(71.0%)(n=94)。与之前的模拟肺活计相比,88.4%的受访者更喜欢新的蓝牙肺活计(n=73)。结论蓝牙家用肺活量计测量结果准确,可用于临床,为患者所接受。此外,它还提供实时远程监测,帮助评估同种异体移植物的功能,这比模拟物更有优势,特别是在COVID期间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
P198 Service evaluation of home spirometry following lung transplantation
Introduction and ObjectivesFollowing Lung Transplantation recipients perform regular spirometry to assess allograft function. Due to infection risks during the COVID pandemic, this was difficult to perform when vulnerable immunosuppressed patients were shielding. Therefore, we provided our patients with home spirometry allowing them to be perform spirometry remotely.MethodsBluetooth spirobank spirometers and an app created by patientMpower to transmit the data were given to 164 lung transplant patients. The service was then evaluated by comparing results from the device against recent (>3 months) spirometry performed at the hospital. The views of clinicians and patients were also obtained about the service through questionnaires.Results164 patients were provided with home spirometers, 112 questionnaires were collected from clinicians following patient consultations and 94 patients were interviewed for their experience. Nearly a quarter of patients (23%) reported difficulties with the spirometer’s initial setting up or using the smartphone app.The FEV1 and FVC readings from home spirometry correlated well with measurements taken in clinic with an R2 of 0.69 and 0.59 respectively (p<0.01 n=78). Clinicians found home spirometry useful in 79.6% (n=112) of consultations and felt the need for hospital spirometry was removed in 63% of cases.Patients were asked to perform spirometry daily or once a week after lung transplantation depending on when they had their transplant. 50% of patients met this goal submitting readings at least three times per week. The median patient rating of the program was 9 out of 10 (10= excellent, n=91). Patient evaluations indicated that the spirometer was easy to use (91.4%), compact (86.0%), and the app was helpful (71.0%) (n=94). In comparison to the previous analogue spirometer, 88.4% of respondents preferred the new Bluetooth spirometer (n=73).ConclusionWe found Bluetooth home spirometer provided accurate results, which was useful in the clinical setting and is acceptable to patients. In addition, it provided real time remote monitoring aiding in assessment of allograft function, which was a benefit over the analogue counterpart particularly during COVID.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信