Telemonitoring in Chronic Heart Failure: A Systematic Review

Table 2

Study characteristics and participants’ data.

Reference	Sample size	Age^†	E.F.	Follow-up period	Transmission modality	NYHA^a class	Study design	Place
(1) Dendale et al. [21]	160	76 ± 10	35 ± 15%	6 m	Cell phone	>II	RCT^b	7 hospitals in Belgium
(2) Wade et al. [22]	316	78.1	Not reported	6 m	Internet link	Not reported	RCT^b	New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania residents
(3) Scherr et al. [23]	120	66 (median, IQR^c 62–72)	<38%	6 m	Mobile phone	II–IV	RCT^b	Austria
(4) Mortara et al. [24]	461	60 ± 11	29 ± 7	12 m	Telephone line	II–IV (2.4±0.6)	RCT^b	11 centers in Italy, UK, and Poland
(5) Dar et al. [25]	182	72 (Mean) SD^d: 12	Not reported	6 m	Telephone line	II–IV	RCT^b	3 acute hospitals in northwest London
(6) Antonicelli et al. [26]	57	78 (Mean) SD^d: 7		12 m	Telephone line	II–IV	RCT^b	Italy
(7) Cleland et al. [27]	426	67 (Mean) SD^d: 12	<40%	8 m	Telephone line	I–IV	RCT^b	16 hospitals in Germany, UK and The Netherlands
(8) Giordano et al. [28]	460	57 ± 10	<40%	12 m	Telephone line	II–IV	RCT^b	5 cardiovascular rehabilitation departments in Italy
(9) Goldberg et al. [29]	280	59 ± 15	<35%	6 m	Telephone line	III-IV	RCT^b	16 heart failure centres in the USA
(10) Tompkins and Orwat [30]	390	76.1 (SD^d: 8.1)	Not reported	6 m	Telephone line	Not reported	RCT^b	Arizona, USA
(11) Soran et al. [31]	315	76 ± 7	23 ± 9%	6 m	Telephone line	II-III	RCT^b	3 cites in Pittsburg, Cleveland, and Miami, USA
(12) Koehler et al. [32]	710	66.9±10.7	≤35%	26 m (median)	Cell phone	II-III	RCT^b	165 practices in Germany

^†Age is reported in years as a mean value unless otherwise stated.
^aNYHA: New York Heart Association, ^bRCT: randomized controlled trial, ^cIQR: interquartile range, ^dSD: standard deviation.