Aim: To investigate acceptance and usage issues in relation to Telehealth products as used by frail older clients of the Transition Care Program and their carers. Method: The study design was a quasi-randomised controlled clinical trial. A stratified random sample of participants was allocated to one of five groups using a random number table. Study participants who were already in possession of a pendant alarm provided by the study service provider at study commencement, or were assessed as needing a pendant alarm, were allocated to the first number out of 1 (control group), 4 or 5 (home Telehealth monitoring with a pedant alarm up to 12 or 24 weeks) on the random number table list. If they were in possession of a pendant alarm that was not from the study service provider they were automatically allocated to the control group. If they were assessed as not needing a pendant alarm they were allocated to the first number on the list out of 2 or 3 (home Telehealth monitoring up to 12 or 24 weeks). In all instances, when a participant was allocated to the first applicable number on the list, that number was crossed off the list. Results: A total of 43 participants who commenced the study used Teleheath equipment. There was a 13% Telehealth reading failure rate. There was no significant difference between clients with and clients without carers for the reading failure rate. This non-significant difference was consistent across all of the identified reasons for why readings failed including staff not following up, participant non-compliance (with and without carer), equipment failure, participants not returning a call from the staff investigating non-reading and user error. Conclusion: If the health of the client requires high reading rate reliability, the fact that the client has a carer to assist them cannot be assumed to increase the safe usage of the Telehealth equipment for reading rate reliability. As such staff should ensure that they are diligent in monitoring in-home Telehealth regardless of the presence or absence of a carer.

Keywords:
Telehealth, Transitional care, Older people, Carer, Quasi-randomised controlled trial
1.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW): Australia’s Health 2006: the Tenth Biennial Health Report of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. AIHW cat. No. AUD73. Canberra, 2006.
2.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW): Disability and Ageing: Australian Population Patterns and Implications. AIHW cat. No. DIS 19. Canberra, 2000.
3.
Australian Government Productivity Commission: Report on Government Services 2009, vol 2: Health, Community Services, Housing, 2009.
4.
Boden M, Da Costa O: Science and technology roadmapping: implications for eHealth (Issue 81). Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, European Commission Joint Research Centre, 2004.
5.
Doughty K, Monk A, Bayliss C, Brown S, Dewsbury L, Dunk B, Gallagher V, Grafham K, Jones M, Lowe C, McAlister C, McSorley K, Mills P, Skidmore C, Stewart A, Taylor B, Ward D: Telecare, Telehealth and assistive technologies: do we know what we’re talking about? Pavilion J (Brighton) 2008;11:36–41.
6.
Celler BG, Lovell NH, Chan KY: The potential impact of home Telecare on client practice. MJA 1999;171:518–521.
7.
Bunn F: The effects of telephone consultation on triage and healthcare use and patient satisfaction: a systematic review. J Gen Pract 2005;55:956–961.
8.
Meystre S: The current state of telemonitoring: a comment on the literature. Telemed J E Health 2005;11:63–69.
9.
Schofield RS, Kline SE, Schmalfuss CM, Carver HM, Aranda JM, Pauly DF, Hill JA, Neugaard B, Chumbler NR: Early outcomes of a care coordination-enhanced telehome care program for elderly veterans with chronic heart failure. Telemed J E Health 2005;11:20–27.
10.
Bowes A, McColgan G: Smart Technology and Community Care for Older People: Innovation in West Lothian, Scotland. Edinburgh, Age Concern Scotland, 2006.
11.
Glueckauf RL: Telehealth and older adults with chronic illness: new frontier for research and practice. Clin Gerontologist 2007;31:1–4.
12.
Barlow J, Singh D, Bayer S, Curry I: A systematic review of the benefits of home Telecare for frail elderly people and those with long-term conditions. J Telemed Telecare 2007;13:172–179.
13.
DeVany M, Alverson D, D’Lorio J, Simmons S: Employing Telehealth to enhance overall quality of life and health for families. Telemed J E Health 2008;14:1003–1007.
14.
Lutz B, Chumbler N, Roland K: Care coordination/home Telehealth for veterans with stroke and their caregivers: addressing an unmet need. Stroke Rehab 2007;14:32–42.
15.
Corlett A: Caring for older people: aids to compliance with medication. Br Med J 1996;313:926–935.
16.
Vermeire E, Hearnshaw H, Van Royen P, Denekens J: Patient adherence to treatment: three decades of research – a comprehensive review. J Clin Pharm Ther 2001;26:331–342.
17.
Buckley KM, Tran BQ, Prandoni CM: Receptiveness, use and acceptance of Telehealth by caregivers of stroke patients in the home. Online J Issues Nursing 2004:31.
18.
Schlachta-Fairchild L, Elffrink V, Deickman A: Patient safety, Telenursing and Telehealth; in Hughes RG (ed): Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence Based Handbook for Nurses. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2008.
19.
Carranza N, Ramos V, Lizana F, Garcia J, Pozo A, Monteagudo J: A literature review of transmission effectiveness and electromagnetic compatability in home telemedicine environments to evaluate safety and security. Telemed E Health 2010;16:818–826.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.