Patient reported experience and adherence to remote patient management in chronic heart failure patients: a posthoc analysis of the TIM-HF2 trial
Authors: Prescher S , Spethmann S , Winkler S , Riehle L , Hiddemann M , Moeller V , Deckwart O 
Published: July 2022

Funding Acknowledgements

Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): German Federal Ministry of Education and Research

Background

Remote Patient Management (RPM) enables early detection and prevention of cardiac deterioration in heart failure (HF) patients by measuring vital signs. Clinical trials reported inconsistent results. Patient adherence was suggested to be one of the main reasons for inconsistent results in previous trials (2-4). The "Telemedical interventional management in heart failure II (TIM-HF2)" study showed the superiority of non-invasive RPM compared to usual care (UC) in terms of mortality and unplanned cardiovascular (CV) hospitalisation (1).

Purpose

The objective of the analysis is to assess the patient experience with RPM, the adherence to daily measurements and outline factors affecting both aspects.

Methods

TIM-HF2 was conducted 2013-2018 with 1,538 HF patients in a 12-month follow-up (5). Inclusion criteria were HF in NYHA class II or III with either LVEF ≤45% or, if LVEF &gt;45%, patients had been treated with oral diuretics; and HF hospitalisation within the last 12 months. Patients with major depression were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to RPM or UC. RPM-Patients had to measure daily weight, blood pressure, ECG and self-rated health status. Data were sent automatically to the telemedical centre (TMC). In case of conspicuous findings, the TMC contacted the patient or GP for therapy adjustment. At the study end, RPM-patients were asked to evaluate the program through a 9-question survey. Adherence was distinguished between measurement of at least one (incomplete adherence- IA) and all vital parameters (complete adherence- CA) and defined as ratio of the number of days of measurements taken divided by the number of days of possible measurements. All data were analysed descriptively (mean ± standard deviation). Differences between groups were analysed by ANOVA and T-Test.

Results

The survey was answered by n=564 patients (response rate: 79.7%). The patients were satisfied with the program and device usability. CA was 89.1±14.1% and consistently high over the study course (table 1). Reasons for dropouts (n=37) were e.g. frustration with the devices and physical inability to complete the measurement protocol.

Patients &lt;70 years and living in rural areas had lower IA rates. The mean adherence was independent of severe of disease (LVEF, NTproBNP, NYHA). Patients (n=244) had significantly lower IA the week prior to an unplanned CV hospitalisation (difference by -5.2±20.5%) compared to the entire study period. IA was significantly lower by -12.8±24.7% in the week after an unplanned CV hospitalisation compared to the entire study period.

Conclusions

In a setting with user-friendly devices, pre-interventional patient training, regular TMC-patient contact and close cooperation between primary physicians and TMC a long-lasting and high adherence and satisfaction regarding RPM could be achieved. A change in adherence might detect deterioration in health status and indicate the need to intensify telemedical care.