Agreement and Reliability of Clinician-in-Clinic Versus Patient-at-Home Clinical and Functional Assessments: Implications for Telehealth Services

To compare agreement and reliability between clinician-measured and patient self-measured clinical and functional assessments for use in remote monitoring, in a home-based setting, using telehealth. Reliability study: repeated-measure, within-subject design. Trained clinicians measured standard clin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation 2020-09, Vol.2 (3), p.100066-100066, Article 100066
Hauptverfasser: Keating, Shelley E., Barnett, Amandine, Croci, Ilaria, Hannigan, Amy, Elvin-Walsh, Louise, Coombes, Jeff S., Campbell, Katrina L., Macdonald, Graeme A., Hickman, Ingrid J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To compare agreement and reliability between clinician-measured and patient self-measured clinical and functional assessments for use in remote monitoring, in a home-based setting, using telehealth. Reliability study: repeated-measure, within-subject design. Trained clinicians measured standard clinical and functional parameters at a face-to-face clinic appointment. Participants were instructed on how to perform the measures at home and to repeat self-assessments within 1 week. Liver transplant recipients (LTRs) (N=18) (52±14y, 56% men, 5.4±4.3y posttransplant] completed the home self-assessments. Not applicable. The outcomes assessed were body weight, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP), waist circumference, repeated chair sit-to-stand (STST), maximal push-ups, and the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Intertester reliability and agreement between face-to-face clinician and self-reported home-based participant measures were determined by intraclass-correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots, which were compared with minimal clinically important differences (MCID) (determined a priori). The mean difference (95% confidence interval) and [limits of agreement] for measures (where positive values indicate lower participant value) were weight, 0.7 (0.01-1.4) kg [−2.2 to 3.6kg]; waist 0.4 (−1.2 to 2.0) cm [−5.9 to 6.8cm]; SBP 7.7 (0.6-14.7 ) mmHg [−19.4 to 34.9mmHg]; DBP 2.4 (−1.4 to 6.2 ) mmHg [−12.2 to 17.0mmHg]; 6MWT, 7.5 (−29.1 to 44.1) m [−127.3 to 142.4m]; STST 0.5 (−0.8 to 1.7) seconds [−4.3 to 5.3s]; maximal push-ups −2.2 (−4.4 to −0.1) [−10.5 to 6.0]. ICCs were all >0.75 except for STST (ICC=0.73). Mean differences indicated good agreement than MCIDs; however, wide limits of agreement indicated large individual variability in agreement. Overall, LTRs can reliably self-assess clinical and functional measures at home. However, there was wide individual variability in accuracy and agreement, with no functional assessment being performed within acceptable limits relative to MCIDs >80% of the time.
ISSN:2590-1095
2590-1095
DOI:10.1016/j.arrct.2020.100066