Back to Search Start Over

A prospective comparison of telemedicine versus in-person delivery of an interprofessional education program for adults with inflammatory arthritis

Authors :
Rachel Shupak
Angelo Papachristos
Kelly Warmington
Caroline Jones
Carol Flewelling
Sydney Lineker
Dorcas E. Beaton
Denise Linton
Carol A. Kennedy
Sheilah Hogg-Johnson
Source :
Journal of telemedicine and telecare. 23(2)
Publication Year :
2016

Abstract

Introduction We evaluated two modes of delivery of an inflammatory arthritis education program (“Prescription for Education” (RxEd)) in improving arthritis self-efficacy and other secondary outcomes. Methods We used a non-randomized, pre-post design to compare videoconferencing (R, remote using telemedicine) versus local (I, in-person) delivery of the program. Data were collected at baseline (T1), immediately following RxEd (T2), and at six months (T3). Self-report questionnaires served as the data collection tool. Measures included demographics, disorder-related, Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale (SE), previous knowledge (Arthritis Community Research and Evaluation Unit (ACREU) rheumatoid arthritis knowledge questionnaire), coping efficacy, Illness Intrusiveness, and Effective Consumer Scale. Analysis included: baseline comparisons and longitudinal trends (R vs I groups); direct between-group comparisons; and Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) analysis. Results A total of 123 persons attended the program (I: n = 36; R: n = 87) and 111 completed the baseline questionnaire (T1), with follow-up completed by 95% ( n = 117) at T2 and 62% ( n = 76) at T3. No significant baseline differences were found across patient characteristics and outcome measures. Both groups (R and I) showed immediate effect (improved arthritis SE, mean change (95% confidence interval (CI)): R 1.07 (0.67, 1.48); I 1.48 (0.74, 2.23)) after the program that diminished over six months (mean change (95% CI): R 0.45 (−0.1, 0.1); I 0.73 (−0.25, 1.7)). For each of the secondary outcomes, both groups showed similar trends for improvement (mean change scores (95% CI)) over time. GEE analysis did not show any meaningful differences between groups (R vs I) over time. Discussion Improvements in arthritis self-efficacy and secondary outcomes displayed similar trends for I and R participant groups.

Details

ISSN :
17581109
Volume :
23
Issue :
2
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Journal of telemedicine and telecare
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....81e08699b75d28e59ba54945309f3e39