An interventional study of Telephone, videophone care in Heart Failure and Telemedicine, sponsored by US Department of Veterans Affairs. Completed at 1 site in United States. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-04-07.
Sponsored by US Department of Veterans Affairs · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Congestive heart failure (CHF) is one of the most common reasons for hospitalization in patients aged 65 years and older. Many hospitalizations for CHF are potentially preventable if the warning signs of decompensation are recognized and treated before the situation becomes emergent. Home-based intervention programs have reduced unplanned readmission rates for patients with CHF by up to 50 percent. Using advanced telecommunications technologies it is now possible to provide greatly improved access and availability of services in a more timely and cost effective manner directly to patients� homes. Although telehealth offers a number of theoretical advantages, few empirical studies have compared telehealth to traditional delivery modes, and virtually no studies have compared the effectiveness of alternative telehealth applications.
Background:
Congestive heart failure (CHF) is one of the most common reasons for hospitalization in patients aged 65 years and older. Many hospitalizations for CHF are potentially preventable if the warning signs of decompensation are recognized and treated before the situation becomes emergent. Home-based intervention programs have reduced unplanned readmission rates for patients with CHF by up to 50 percent. Using advanced telecommunications technologies it is now possible to provide greatly improved access and availability of services in a more timely and cost effective manner directly to patients� homes. Although telehealth offers a number of theoretical advantages, few empirical studies have compared telehealth to traditional delivery modes, and virtually no studies have compared the effectiveness of alternative telehealth applications.
Objectives:
The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness and resource use of two telehealth interventions to traditional care provided for recently discharged outpatients with CHF. Four hypotheses will be tested. Compared to subjects who receive usual care, subjects who receive telehealth interventions (telephone or interactive video) following discharge will: 1) have lower readmission rates; 2) report improved quality of life, self-efficacy, and satisfaction with care; 3) use fewer resources, including hospital days, urgent care visits, and telephone calls; and 4) have higher survival rates.
Methods:
The study is a randomized controlled clinical trial. We will compare usual care to an intervention delivered by either telephone or interactive video to veterans following discharge from the hospital. A total of 198 subjects will be enrolled over three years. Subjects in the treatment groups (telephone or interactive video) will receive the intervention for 90 days following discharge from the hospital. Data to be collected includes measures of quality of life, self-efficacy, satisfaction, resource use, and mortality.
Status:
Project work is ongoing.
5,701 studies on the registry are indexed under Heart Failure; 1,220 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 198 is above the median of 72 across 3,736 interventional studies indexed under Heart Failure.
Browse Heart Failure studies →US Department of Veterans Affairs is the lead sponsor of 658 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Patients admitted to the Iowa City VA Medical Center for treatment of congestive heart failure exacerbation. Must be cognitively intact and have a telephone line in the home.
Exclusion Criteria:
Procedure: Telephone, videophone care
This study is completed, as verified in Feb 2007. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
US Department of Veterans Affairs