↓ Skip to main content

Adherence and factors affecting satisfaction in long-term telerehabilitation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mixed methods study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
355 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
Adherence and factors affecting satisfaction in long-term telerehabilitation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a mixed methods study
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, February 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12911-016-0264-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hanne Hoaas, Hege Kristin Andreassen, Linda Aarøen Lien, Audhild Hjalmarsen, Paolo Zanaboni

Abstract

Telemedicine may increase accessibility to pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), thus enhancing long-term exercise maintenance. We aimed to explore COPD patients' adherence and experiences in long-term telerehabilitation to understand factors affecting satisfaction and potential for service improvements. A two-year pilot study with 10 patients with COPD was conducted. The intervention included treadmill exercise training at home and a webpage for telemonitoring and self-management combined with weekly videoconferencing sessions with a physiotherapist. We conducted four separate series of data collection. Adherence was measured in terms of frequency of registrations on the webpage. Factors affecting satisfaction and adherence, together with potential for service improvements, were explored through two semi-structured focus groups and an individual open-ended questionnaire. Qualitative data were analysed by systematic text condensation. User friendliness was measured by the means of a usability questionnaire. On average, participants registered 3.0 symptom reports/week in a web-based diary and 1.7 training sessions/week. Adherence rate decreased during the second year. Four major themes regarding factors affecting satisfaction, adherence and potential improvements of the intervention emerged: (i) experienced health benefits; (ii) increased self-efficacy and independence; and (iii) emotional safety due to regular meetings and access to special competence; (iv) maintenance of motivation. Participants were generally highly satisfied with the technical components of the telerehabilitation intervention. Long-term adherence to telerehabilitation in COPD was maintained for a two-year period. Satisfaction was supported by experienced health benefits, self-efficacy, and emotional safety. Maintenance of motivation was a challenge and might have affected long-term adherence. Four key factors of potential improvements in long-term telerehabilitation were identified: (i) adherence to different components of the telerehabilitation intervention is dependent on the level of focus provided by the health personnel involved; (ii) the potential for regularity that lies within the technology should be exploited to avoid relapses after vacation; (iii) motivation might be increased by tailoring individual consultations to support experiences of good health and meet individual goals and motivational strategies; (iv) interactive functionalities or gaming tools might provide peer-support, peer-modelling and enhance motivation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 355 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 352 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 62 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 13%
Student > Bachelor 44 12%
Researcher 33 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 5%
Other 47 13%
Unknown 105 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 89 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 65 18%
Psychology 16 5%
Social Sciences 12 3%
Sports and Recreations 8 2%
Other 41 12%
Unknown 124 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 February 2016.
All research outputs
#12,887,244
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#866
of 1,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,336
of 298,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#17
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,991 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 298,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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.