Population level impact of a pulse oximetry remote monitoring programme on mortality and healthcare utilisation in the people with covid-19 in England: a national analysis using a stepped wedge design

  1. T Beaney
  2. J Clarke
  3. A Alboksmaty
  4. K Flott
  5. A Fowler
  6. JR Benger
  7. P Aylin
  8. S Elkin
  9. AL Neves
  10. A Darzi
1 evaluations Published on
Read the full article Related papers
This article on Sciety

Abstract

Objectives

To identify the population level impact of a national pulse oximetry remote monitoring programme for covid-19 (COVID Oximetry @home; CO@h) in England on mortality and health service use.

Design

Retrospective cohort study using a stepped wedge pre- and post-implementation design.

Setting

All Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England implementing a local CO@h programme.

Participants

217,650 people with a positive covid-19 polymerase chain reaction test result and symptomatic, from 1st October 2020 to 3rd May 2021, aged ≥65 years or identified as clinically extremely vulnerable. Care home residents were excluded.

Interventions

A pre-intervention period before implementation of the CO@h programme in each CCG was compared to a post-intervention period after implementation.

Main outcome measures

Five outcome measures within 28 days of a positive covid-19 test: i) death from any cause; ii) any A&E attendance; iii) any emergency hospital admission; iv) critical care admission; and v) total length of hospital stay.

Results

Implementation of the programme was not associated with mortality or length of hospital stay. Implementation was associated with increased health service utilisation with a 12% increase in the odds of A&E attendance (95% CI: 6%-18%) and emergency hospital admission (95% CI: 5%-20%) and a 24% increase in the odds of critical care admission in those admitted (95% CI: 5%-47%). In a secondary analysis of CO@h sites with at least 10% or 20% of eligible people enrolled, there was no significant association with any outcome measure. However, uptake of the programme was low, with enrolment data received for only 5,527 (2.5%) of the eligible population.

Conclusions

At a population level, there was no association with mortality following implementation of the CO@h programme, and small increases in health service utilisation were observed. Low enrolment of eligible people may have diluted the effects of the programme at a population level.

Related articles

Related articles are currently not available for this article.