↓ Skip to main content

The evaluation of a remote support program on quality of life and evolution of disease in COPD patients with frequent exacerbations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The evaluation of a remote support program on quality of life and evolution of disease in COPD patients with frequent exacerbations
Published in
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12890-016-0304-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bernardino Alcazar, Pilar de Lucas, Joan B. Soriano, Alonso Fernández-Nistal, Antonia Fuster, Jose Miguel Rodríguez González-Moro, Aurelio Arnedillo, Patricia García Sidro, María José Espinosa de los Monteros

Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients often present considerable individual medical burden in their symptoms, limitations, and well-being that complicate medical treatment. To improve their overall health status, while reducing the number of exacerbations, a multidisciplinary approach including different elements of care is needed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a remote support program on COPD patients at high risk of experiencing worsening of their disease and other health-related outcomes. An observational, multicenter, prospective study aimed at evaluating the impact of a 7-month remote support program on COPD patients in exacerbations control and changes in health status measured with the COPD assessment test (CAT). Factors associated with a clinically relevant decrease in CAT were assessed using a logistic regression analysis. A total of 114 subjects started the program. The majority of the study population were males (81.6 %), retired (70.2 %), without academic qualifications or with a low level of education (68.4 %), and ex-smokers (79.8 %). The mean ± SD age was 69.6 ± 9.1 years and the BMI was 27.8 ± 5.5 Kg/m(2). Overall, 41.9 % (95 % CI 31.9-52.0) patients, significantly improved health status (CAT decrease ≥ 2 points). Univariate analysis showed that significant improvement in CAT was associated with baseline CAT scores [high CAT score 19.2 (±7.5) vs. low CAT score 12.4 (±6.4); OR = 1.15, 95 % CI: 1.07-1.24; p < 0.001] and with being non-compliant [62.5 % (15/24) of non-compliant vs 34.7 % (24/69) of compliant patients significantly improved CAT scores; OR = 3.13, 95 % CI: 1.19-8.19; p = 0.021). After controlling for the effect of all variables in a multivariable logistic regression model, the only factor that remained significant was baseline CAT score. The proportion of smokers in the total population remained constant during the study. There was a significant reduction in the number of exacerbations after entering this remote support program with median -1 (IQR: -2, 0), (p < 0.001). The Morisky-Green questionnaire showed an increase of treatment compliance, namely at baseline, 25.8 % (24/93) of patients were noncompliant while in the end 66.7 % (16/24) of them became compliant) (p = 0.053). A remote support program for high-risk COPD patients results in an improvement of the patients' health status, particularly in those with initially poor health status, and it helps to reduce COPD exacerbations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 116 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 12%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 33 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 15%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Psychology 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 43 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2016.
All research outputs
#14,279,821
of 22,899,952 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#860
of 1,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,298
of 312,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#18
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,899,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.