Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

The implementation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England

View ORCID ProfileCecilia Vindrola-Padros, View ORCID ProfileManbinder S Sidhu, View ORCID ProfileTheo Georghiou, View ORCID ProfileChris Sherlaw-Johnson, View ORCID ProfileKelly Elizabeth Singh, View ORCID ProfileSonila M Tomini, View ORCID ProfileJo Ellins, Steve Morris, View ORCID ProfileNaomi J Fulop
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.12.20230318
Cecilia Vindrola-Padros
1Department of Targeted Intervention, University College London (UCL), Charles Bell House, 43-45 Foley Street, London, W1W 7TY, United Kingdom
Roles: Senior Research Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Cecilia Vindrola-Padros
  • For correspondence: c.vindrola@ucl.ac.uk
Manbinder S Sidhu
2Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Park House, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
Roles: Research Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Manbinder S Sidhu
Theo Georghiou
3Nuffield Trust, 59 New Cavendish Street, London, W1G 7LP, UK
Roles: Senior Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Theo Georghiou
Chris Sherlaw-Johnson
3Nuffield Trust, 59 New Cavendish Street, London, W1G 7LP, UK
Roles: Senior Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Chris Sherlaw-Johnson
Kelly Elizabeth Singh
2Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Park House, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
Roles: Evaluation Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kelly Elizabeth Singh
Sonila M Tomini
4UCL Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, Gower Street London WC1E 6BT, UK
Roles: Research Fellow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sonila M Tomini
Jo Ellins
2Health Services Management Centre, School of Social Policy, University of Birmingham, Park House, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2RT, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jo Ellins
Steve Morris
5University of Cambridge
Roles: RAND Professor of Health Services Research
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Naomi J Fulop
4UCL Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, Gower Street London WC1E 6BT, UK
Roles: Professor of Health Care Organisation and Management
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Naomi J Fulop
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Objective There is a paucity of evidence for the implementation of remote home monitoring for COVID-19 infection. The aims of this study were to: identify the key characteristics of remote home monitoring models for COVID-19 infection, explore the experiences of staff implementing these models, understand the use of data for monitoring progress against outcomes, and document variability in staffing and resource allocation.

Methods This was a multi-site mixed methods study that combined qualitative and quantitative approaches to analyse the implementation and impact of remote home monitoring models during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (March to August 2020). The study combined interviews (n=22) with staff delivering these models across eight sites in England with the collection and analysis of data on staffing models and resource allocation.

Results The models varied in relation to the healthcare settings and mechanisms used for patient triage, monitoring and escalation. Implementation was embedded in existing staff workloads and budgets. Good communication within clinical teams, culturally-appropriate information for patients/carers and the combination of multiple approaches for patient monitoring (app and paper-based) were considered facilitators in implementation. The mean cost per monitored patient varied from £400 to £553, depending on the model.

Conclusions It is necessary to provide the means for evaluating the effectiveness of these models, for example, by establishing comparator data. Future research should also focus on the sustainability of the models and patient experience (considering the extent to which some of the models exacerbate existing inequalities in access to care).

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

  • The study makes a contribution to existing evidence on remote home monitoring models by exploring the design and implementation of these models for confirmed or suspected COVID-19 cases.

  • The study was carried out across eight remote home monitoring models implemented in England, capturing variability in the mechanisms used for triage, monitoring and escalation.

  • Limited evidence was available to assess the effectiveness of the remote home monitoring models.

  • No comparator data were available for the absence of remote home monitoring.

  • The study was designed as a rapid evaluation and only captured experiences and processes of implementation in a convenience sample of eight models implemented during the first wave of the pandemic in England.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

The study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research-NIHR (Health Services and Delivery Research, 16/138/17 Rapid Service Evaluation Research Team; or The Birmingham, RAND and Cambridge Evaluation (BRACE) Centre Team (HSDR16/138/31) and NJF is an NIHR Senior Investigator; no authors have financial relationships with any organisations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no authors have other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the HS&DR, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study was reviewed and classified as a service evaluation by the HRA decision tool and the UCL/UCLH Joint Research Office. It was also reviewed by the University of Birmingham Research Ethics Committee (REC): ERN_13-1085AP37.

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • c.vindrola{at}ucl.ac.uk, m.s.sidhu{at}bham.ac.uk, theo.georghiou{at}nuffieldtrust.org.uk, chris.sherlaw-johnson{at}nuffieldtrust.org.uk, k.e.singh{at}bham.ac.uk, s.tomini{at}ucl.ac.uk, j.l.ellins{at}bham.ac.uk, sm2428{at}medschl.cam.ac.uk, n.fulop{at}ucl.ac.uk

Data Availability

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted November 15, 2020.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The implementation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
The implementation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England
Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Manbinder S Sidhu, Theo Georghiou, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Kelly Elizabeth Singh, Sonila M Tomini, Jo Ellins, Steve Morris, Naomi J Fulop
medRxiv 2020.11.12.20230318; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.12.20230318
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
The implementation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England
Cecilia Vindrola-Padros, Manbinder S Sidhu, Theo Georghiou, Chris Sherlaw-Johnson, Kelly Elizabeth Singh, Sonila M Tomini, Jo Ellins, Steve Morris, Naomi J Fulop
medRxiv 2020.11.12.20230318; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.12.20230318

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (238)
  • Allergy and Immunology (519)
  • Anesthesia (124)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1407)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (217)
  • Dermatology (158)
  • Emergency Medicine (291)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (580)
  • Epidemiology (10264)
  • Forensic Medicine (6)
  • Gastroenterology (526)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2611)
  • Geriatric Medicine (253)
  • Health Economics (495)
  • Health Informatics (1727)
  • Health Policy (788)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (669)
  • Hematology (266)
  • HIV/AIDS (563)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (12066)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (647)
  • Medical Education (272)
  • Medical Ethics (83)
  • Nephrology (286)
  • Neurology (2448)
  • Nursing (143)
  • Nutrition (374)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (486)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (565)
  • Oncology (1314)
  • Ophthalmology (397)
  • Orthopedics (145)
  • Otolaryngology (235)
  • Pain Medicine (168)
  • Palliative Medicine (51)
  • Pathology (341)
  • Pediatrics (776)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (328)
  • Primary Care Research (294)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2390)
  • Public and Global Health (4987)
  • Radiology and Imaging (892)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (520)
  • Respiratory Medicine (680)
  • Rheumatology (307)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (253)
  • Sports Medicine (244)
  • Surgery (296)
  • Toxicology (45)
  • Transplantation (140)
  • Urology (108)