Effect of a telemedicine intervention for diabetes-related foot ulcers on health, well-being and quality of life: secondary outcomes from a cluster randomized controlled trial (DiaFOTo)

Marjolein M Iversen, Jannicke Igland, Hilde Smith-Strøm, Truls Østbye, Grethe S Tell, Svein Skeie, John G Cooper, Mark Peyrot, Marit Graue, Marjolein M Iversen, Jannicke Igland, Hilde Smith-Strøm, Truls Østbye, Grethe S Tell, Svein Skeie, John G Cooper, Mark Peyrot, Marit Graue

Abstract

Background: Follow-up care provided via telemedicine (TM) is intended to be a more integrated care pathway to manage diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFU) than traditionally-delivered healthcare. However, knowledge of the effect of TM follow-up on PROMs including self-reported health, well-being and QOL in patients with DFUs is lacking and often neglected in RCT reports in general. Therefore, in this study of secondary outcomes from the DiaFOTo trial, the aim was to compare changes in self-reported health, well-being and QOL between patients with DFUs receiving telemedicine follow-up care in primary healthcare in collaboration with specialist healthcare, and patients receiving standard outpatient care.

Methods: The current study reports secondary endpoints from a cluster randomized controlled trial whose primary endpoint was ulcer healing time. The trial included 182 adults with diabetes-related foot ulcers (94/88 in the telemedicine/standard care groups) in 42 municipalities/districts, recruited from three clinical sites in Western Norway. Mean (SD) diabetes duration for the study population was 20.8 (15.0). The intervention group received care in the community in collaboration with specialist healthcare using an asynchronous telemedicine intervention. The intervention included an interactive web-based ulcer record and a mobile phone enabling counseling and communication between the community nurses and specialist healthcare; the control group received standard outpatient care. In total 156 participants (78/78) reported on secondary endpoints: self-reported health, well-being and quality of life evaluated by generic and disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (e.g. Euro-QOL, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID), Neuropathy and Foot Ulcer-Specific Quality of Life Instrument (NeuroQOL)). Linear mixed-effects regression was used to investigate possible differences in changes in the scores between the intervention and control group at the end of follow-up.

Results: In intention to treat analyses, differences between treatment groups were small and non-significant for the health and well-being scale scores, as well as for diabetes-related distress and foot ulcer-specific quality of life.

Conclusions: There were no significant differences in changes in scores for the patient reported outcomes between the intervention and control group, indicating that the intervention did not affect the participants' health, well-being and quality of life.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov , NCT01710774 . Registered October 19th, 2012.

Keywords: Clinical trials; Diabetic foot; Health care delivery; Psychological aspects.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. Cartwright M, et al. Effect of telehealth on quality of life and psychological outcomes over 12 months (whole systems demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested study of patient reported outcomes in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2013;346:f653. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f653.
    1. Khunkaew S, Fernandez R, Sim J. Health-related quality of life among adults living with diabetic foot ulcers: a meta-analysis. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(6):1413–1427. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-2082-2.
    1. Hogg FR, et al. Measures of health-related quality of life in diabetes-related foot disease: a systematic review. Diabetologia. 2012;55(3):552–565. doi: 10.1007/s00125-011-2372-5.
    1. Wukich DK, Raspovic KM. Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with diabetic foot disease: why is it important and how can we improve? The 2017 Roger E. Pecoraro Award Lecture. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(3):391–397. doi: 10.2337/dci17-0029.
    1. Vileikyte L, et al. Diabetic peripheral neuropathy and depressive symptoms: the association revisited. Diabetes Care. 2005;28(10):2378–2383. doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.10.2378.
    1. Gonzalez JS, et al. Depression predicts first but not recurrent diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetologia. 2010;53(10):2241–2248. doi: 10.1007/s00125-010-1821-x.
    1. Iversen MM, et al. Is depression a risk factor for diabetic foot ulcers? 11-years follow-up of the Nord-Trondelag health study (HUNT) J Diabetes Complicat. 2015;29(1):20–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2014.09.006.
    1. Rasmussen BS, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing Telemedical and standard outpatient monitoring of diabetic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(9):1723–1729. doi: 10.2337/dc15-0332.
    1. Smith-Strom H, et al. The effect of telemedicine follow-up care on diabetes-related foot ulcers: a cluster-randomized controlled noninferiority trial. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(1):96–103. doi: 10.2337/dc17-1025.
    1. Iversen MM, et al. Telemedicine versus standard follow-up Care for Diabetes-Related Foot Ulcers: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled noninferiority trial (DiaFOTo) JMIR Res Protoc. 2016;5(3):e148. doi: 10.2196/resprot.5646.
    1. Christiansen EK, et al. Shared electronic health record systems: key legal and security challenges. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2017;11(6):1234–1239. doi: 10.1177/1932296817709797.
    1. Nord E. EuroQol: health-related quality of life measurement. Valuations of health states by the general public in Norway. Health Policy. 1991;18(1):25–36. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(91)90141-J.
    1. Devlin NJ, et al. Valuing health-related quality of life: an EQ-5D-5L value set for England. Health Econ. 2018;27(1):7–22. doi: 10.1002/hec.3564.
    1. Hajos TR, et al. Psychometric and screening properties of the WHO-5 well-being index in adult outpatients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 2013;30(2):e63–e69. doi: 10.1111/dme.12040.
    1. Bjelland I, et al. The validity of the hospital anxiety and depression scale. An updated literature review. J Psychosom Res. 2002;52(2):69–77. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3999(01)00296-3.
    1. Polonsky WH, et al. Assessment of diabetes-related distress. Diabetes Care. 1995;18(6):754–760. doi: 10.2337/diacare.18.6.754.
    1. Graue M, et al. Diabetes-related emotional distress in adults: reliability and validity of the Norwegian versions of the problem areas in diabetes scale (PAID) and the diabetes distress scale (DDS) Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49(2):174–182. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.08.007.
    1. Vileikyte L, et al. The development and validation of a neuropathy- and foot ulcer-specific quality of life instrument. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(9):2549–2555. doi: 10.2337/diacare.26.9.2549.
    1. Smith-Strom H, et al. Severity and duration of diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) before seeking care as predictors of healing time: A retrospective cohort study. PLoS ONE [Electronic Resource] 2017;12(5):e0177176. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177176.
    1. Oyibo SO, et al. A comparison of two diabetic foot ulcer classification systems: the Wagner and the University of Texas wound classification systems. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(1):84–88. doi: 10.2337/diacare.24.1.84.
    1. Rixon L, et al. A RCT of telehealth for COPD patient's quality of life: the whole system demonstrator evaluation. Clin Respir J. 2017;11(4):459–469. doi: 10.1111/crj.12359.
    1. Hirani SP, et al. The effect of Telehealth on quality of life and psychological outcomes over a 12-month period in a diabetes cohort within the whole systems demonstrator cluster randomized trial. JMIR Diabetes. 2017;2(2):e18. doi: 10.2196/diabetes.7128.
    1. Jaana M, Pare G, Sicotte C. Home telemonitoring for respiratory conditions: a systematic review. Am J Manag Care. 2009;15(5):313–320.
    1. Verhoeven F, et al. Asynchronous and synchronous teleconsultation for diabetes care: a systematic literature review. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4(3):666–684. doi: 10.1177/193229681000400323.
    1. Smith-Strom H, et al. An integrated wound-care pathway, supported by telemedicine, and competent wound management-essential in follow-up care of adults with diabetic foot ulcers. Int J Med Inform. 2016;94:59–66. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2016.06.020.
    1. Kolltveit BC, et al. Telemedicine in diabetes foot care delivery: health care professionals' experience. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016;16:134. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1377-7.
    1. Kolltveit BH, et al. Telemedicine follow-up facilitates more comprehensive diabetes foot ulcer care: a qualitative study in home-based and specialist health care. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(5–6):e1134–e1145. doi: 10.1111/jocn.14193.
    1. Kolltveit BH, et al. Conditions for success in introducing telemedicine in diabetes foot care: a qualitative inquiry. BMC Nurs. 2017;16:2. doi: 10.1186/s12912-017-0201-y.
    1. Jeffcoate WJ, et al. Current challenges and opportunities in the prevention and Management of Diabetic Foot Ulcers. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(4):645–652. doi: 10.2337/dc17-1836.
    1. Kidholm K, et al. More research is needed in telemedicine for well-defined patient groups. Ugeskr Laeger. 2014;176(12a).
    1. Harris J, et al. How patient and community involvement in diabetes research influences health outcomes: a realist review. Health Expect. 2019.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever