Evidence Hub

Home Monitoring in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

C. Moor, R. Mostard, J. Grutters, P. Bresser, J. Aerts, N. Chavannes, M. Wijsenbeek

American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 2020

90 participants · 112 citations

Abstract

RATIONALE

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a deadly disease with increasingly impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL). EHealth technologies facilitate collection of physiological outcomes and patient reported-outcomes (PROMs) at home, but randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effects of eHealth are scarce. We investigated whether a home monitoring program improved HRQOL and medication use for IPF patients.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter RCT in newly treated patients with IPF. Patients were randomly assigned to standard care or a home monitoring program on top of standard care for 24 weeks. The home monitoring program included home spirometry, reporting of symptoms and side-effects, PROMs, information, a medication coach and eConsultations. The primary endpoint was between-group difference in change in Kings Brief Interstitial Lung disease (K-BILD) questionnaire score at 24 weeks.

RESULTS

90 patients were randomized (46 patients home monitoring, 44 standard care). After 24 weeks, no statistically significant differences were found in K-BILD total score (home monitoring group:+2.7 points, standard care:+0.03, p=0.24) and psychological domain score (home monitoring group:+5.1, standard care:-0.5, p=0.1). In the home monitoring group medication was more often adjusted (1 vs 0.3 adjustments per patient, p=0.027). Patient satisfaction with the home monitoring program was high. Home-based spirometry was highly correlated with hospital-based spirometry over…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 90 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free