Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of telecare interventions on quality of life in older adults: a systematic review

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Recently, an increase in the older adult population, their chronic diseases, and functional disabilities have led to an increase in the need for more healthcare services. Telecare is one of the solutions for caring these people and can improve their quality of life.

Aim

The objective of this study was to investigate impact of telecare interventions on quality of life in older adults.

Methods

This was a systematic review conducted in 2021. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, Embase, IEEE Xplore, and ProQuest databases as well as Google Scholar were searched until the end of 2020 to retrieve relevant articles published in English. The quality of the studies was assessed using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment checklists and the mixed-methods appraisal tool (MMAT). The risk of bias in the studies was assessed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) and the risk of bias in non-randomized studies—of interventions (ROBINS-I).

Results

In total, ten out of 1245 articles identified in the initial search, were included in this study. Telemonitoring (n = 7) and telerehabilitation (n = 3) were the most common methods of telecare interventions. Overall, the findings showed that in most studies, different dimensions of quality of life were improved after using these interventions (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Evaluating impact of telecare interventions on quality of life, especially in older adults can help system developers to improve current and future telecare technologies to meet users’ requirements. Future studies can focus on evaluating the impact of specific telecare systems for a particular target group using different research methodologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Onor ML, Trevisiol M, Urciuoli O et al (2008) Effectiveness of telecare in elderly populations-a comparison of three settings. Telemed J E Health 14:164–169. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2007.0028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Soltanzadeh L, Reabiee M, Taheri A (2013) Continuous telemetric ECG monitoring. Nurs Midwifery J 11:564–569

    Google Scholar 

  3. Stowe S, Harding S (2010) Telecare, telehealth and telemedicine. Eur Geriatr Med 1:193–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurger.2010.04.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dhillon JS, Wünsche BC, Lutteroth C (2014) Designing and evaluating online telehealth systems for seniors. In: Hippe ZS, Kulikowski JL, Mroczek T et al (eds) Human-Computer Systems Interaction: Backgrounds and Applications 3. Springer, Cham, pp 167–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08491-6_14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. United Nations (2019) World population ageing 2019—highlights. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/3846855?ln=en. Accessed 31 Dec 2021

  6. World Health Organization (2018) Ageing and health. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health. Accessed 23 Dec 2021

  7. Andreasen J, Lund H, Aadahl M et al (2015) Content validation of the Tilburg Frailty Indicator from the perspective of frail elderly: a qualitative explorative study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 61:392–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2015.08.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S et al (2013) Frailty in elderly people. Lancet 381:752–762. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)62167-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pierleoni P, Belli A, Maurizi L et al (2016) A wearable fall detector for elderly people based on AHRS and barometric sensor. IEEE Sens J 16:6733–6744. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2016.2585667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Iolascon G, de Sire A, Calafiore D et al (2020) Multifactorial assessment of risk of falling in 753 post-menopausal women: a multicenter cross-sectional study by the Italian group for the study of metabolic bone diseases. Clin Interv Aging 15:1077–1084. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S257304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bertschi D, Kiss CM, Beerli N et al (2022) Impact of sarcopenia on daily functioning: a cross-sectional study among older inpatients. Aging Clin Exp Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-022-02175-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Venturelli M, Reggiani C, Schena F (2022) Beyond the current knowledge on sarcopenia: new insight on neuromuscular factors. Aging Clin Exp Res 34:1183–1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-022-02082-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lippi L, de Sire A, Mezian K et al (2022) Impact of exercise training on muscle mitochondria modifications in older adults: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Aging Clin Exp Res 34:1495–1510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-021-02073-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. De Cola MC, Maresca G, D’Aleo G et al (2020) Teleassistance for frail elderly people: a usability and customer satisfaction study. Geriatr Nurs 41:463–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2020.01.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Barlow J, Singh D, Bayer S et al (2007) A systematic review of the benefits of home telecare for frail elderly people and those with long-term conditions. J Telemed Telecare 13:172–179. https://doi.org/10.1258/135763307780908058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mehraeen E, Bagheri S, Karimi M (2016) Review of necessary infrastructures to telemedicine implementation in hospitals affiliated with Zabol University of Medical Sciences. J Paramed Sci Rehabil 5:74–82. https://doi.org/10.22038/JPSR.2016.7346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Barrett D, Thorpe J, Goodwin N (2014) Examining perspectives on telecare: factors influencing adoption, implementation and usage. Smart Homecare Technol Telehealth 3:1–8. https://doi.org/10.2147/SHTT.S53770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Agree EM (2014) The potential for technology to enhance independence for those aging with a disability. Disabil Health J 7:S33–S39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2013.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Katz R (2015) Tele-care robot for assisting independent senior citizens who live at home. Stud Health Technol Inf 217:288–294. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-566-1-288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Calafiore D, Negrini F, Tottoli N et al (2022) Efficacy of robotic exoskeleton for gait rehabilitation in patients with subacute stroke: a systematic review. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 58:1–8. https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.21.06846-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Botsis T, Demiris G, Pedersen S et al (2008) Home telecare technologies for the elderly. J Telemed Telecare 14:333–337. https://doi.org/10.1258/jtt.2008.007002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Johannessen TB, Storm M, Holm AL (2019) Safety for older adults using telecare: perceptions of homecare professionals. Nurs Open 6:1254–1261. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sabharwal S, Wilson H, Reilly P et al (2015) Heterogeneity of the definition of elderly age in current orthopaedic research. Springerplus 4:516. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1307-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Crews DE, Zavotka S (2006) Aging, disability and frailty: implications for universal design. J Physiol Anthropol 25:113–118. https://doi.org/10.2114/jpa2.25.113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ma LL, Wang YY, Yang ZH et al (2020) Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? Mil Med Res 7:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40779-020-00238-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S et al (2018) Mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT), version 2018 user guide. Registration of copyright (#1148552). Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Industry Canada. http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/127916259/MMAT_2018_criteria-manual_2018-08-01_ENG. Pdf. Accessed 6 July 2022

  28. Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ et al (2019) RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366:l4898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC et al (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 355:i4919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Duke C (2005) The frail elderly community-based case management project. Geriatr Nurs 26:122–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2005.03.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Chumbler NR, Neugaard B, Kobb R et al (2005) Evaluation of a care coordination/home-telehealth program for veterans with diabetes: health services utilization and health-related quality of life. Eval Health Prof 28:464–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278705281079

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Gellis ZD, Kenaley B, McGinty J et al (2012) Outcomes of a telehealth intervention for homebound older adults with heart or chronic respiratory failure: a randomized controlled trial. Gerontologist 52:541–552. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnr134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bedra M, Finkelstein J (2015) Feasibility of post-acute hip fracture tele-rehabilitation in older adults. Stud Health Technol Inf 210:469–473

    Google Scholar 

  34. De Luca R, Bramanti A, De Cola MC et al (2016) Tele-health-care in the elderly living in nursing home: the first Sicilian multimodal approach. Aging Clin Exp Res 28:753–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-015-0463-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Walker PP, Pompilio PP, Zanaboni P et al (2018) Telemonitoring in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (CHROMED): a randomized clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 198:620–628. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201712-2404OC

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Cartwright M, Hirani SP, Rixon L et al (2013) Effect of telehealth on quality of life and psychological outcomes over 12 months (whole systems demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study): nested study of patient reported outcomes in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ 346:f653. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Van Doorn-van Atten MN, Haveman-Nies A, Heery D et al (2019) Feasibility and effectiveness of nutritional telemonitoring for home care clients: a pilot study. Gerontologist 59:158–166. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gny059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tsai LL, McNamara RJ, Moddel C et al (2017) Home-based tele-rehabilitation via real-time videoconferencing improves endurance exercise capacity in patients with COPD: the randomized controlled TeleR study. Respirology 22:699–707. https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.12966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lai JC, Woo J, Hui E et al (2004) Tele-rehabilitation—a new model for community-based stroke rehabilitation. J Telemed Telecare 10:199–205. https://doi.org/10.1258/1357633041424340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bauer MS, Krawczyk L, Miller CJ et al (2016) Team-based telecare for bipolar disorder. Telemed J E Health 22:855–864. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2015.0255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kenealy TW, Parsons MJ, Rouse AP et al (2015) Telecare for diabetes, CHF or COPD: effect on quality of life, hospital use and costs, a randomized controlled trial and qualitative evaluation. PloS One 10:e0116188. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116188

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernández JL et al (2014) Cost-effectiveness of telecare for people with social care needs: the whole systems demonstrator cluster randomized trial. Age Ageing 43:794–800. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afu067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Servello A, Rossi A, Bruni R et al (2012) Geriatric telecare, a new model of assistance: a pilot study. Recent Prog Med. https://doi.org/10.1701/1171.12977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Vestergaard AS, Hansen L, Sørensen SS et al (2020) Is telehealthcare for heart failure patients cost-effective? An economic evaluation alongside the Danish Telecare North heart failure trial. BMJ Open 10:e031670. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Mehrabian S, Extra J, Wu YH et al (2015) The perceptions of cognitively impaired patients and their caregivers of a home telecare system. Med Devices (Auckl) 8:21–29. https://doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S70520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Chou CC, Chang CP, Lee TT et al (2013) Technology acceptance and quality of life of the elderly in a telecare program. Comput Inf Nurs 31:335–342. https://doi.org/10.1097/NXN.0b013e318295e5ce

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Jeng MY, Yeh TM, Pai FY (2020) Analyzing older adults’ perceived values of using smart bracelets by means-end chain. Healthcare (Basel) 8:494. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8040494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Fortuna KL, DiMilia PR, Lohman MC et al (2018) Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of a peer-delivered and technology supported self-management intervention for older adults with serious mental illness. Psychiatr Q 89:293–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-017-9534-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Lai FH, Yan EW, Yu KK et al (2020) The protective impact of telemedicine on persons with dementia and their caregivers during the covid-19 pandemic. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 28:1175–1184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2020.07.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Mitseva A, Peterson CB, Karamberi C et al (2012) Gerontechnology: providing a helping hand when caring for cognitively impaired older adults-intermediate results from a controlled study on the satisfaction and acceptance of informal caregivers. Curr Gerontol Geriatr Res 2012:401705. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/401705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Narkprasit C (2020) Innovative mobile technology application to enhance healthcare and quality of life for senior citizens in Bangkok, Thailand. J Public Health Dev 18:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ling THY, Wong LJ (2016) Elderly infrared body temperature telemonitoring system with XBee wireless protocol. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Sensing Technology (ICST). IEEE Auckland, New Zealand. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSensT.2015.7438455

  53. Meystre S (2005) The current state of telemonitoring: a comment on the literature. Telemed J E Health 11:63–69. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2005.11.63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ayatollahi H, Bath PA, Goodacre S (2013) Information needs of clinicians and non-clinicians in the emergency department: a qualitative study. Health Inf Libr J 30:191–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Ayatollahi H, Bath PA, Goodacre S (2009) Accessibility versus confidentiality of information in the emergency department. Emerg Med J 26:857–860. https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.2008.070557

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Shagerdi G, Ayatollahi H, Hemmat M (2022) Opportunities for using health information technology for elderly care in the emergency departments: a qualitative study. Perspect Health Inf Manag 19:1h

    Google Scholar 

  57. Shagerdi G, Ayatollahi H, Hemmat M (2022) Emergency care for the elderly: a review of the application of health information technology. Health Policy Technol 11:100592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2021.100592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Huang JC (2011) Exploring the acceptance of telecare among senior citizens: an application of back-propagation network. Telemed J E Health 17:111–117. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2010.0118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Velayati F, Ayatollahi H, Hemmat M (2020) A systematic review of the effectiveness of tele-rehabilitation interventions for therapeutic purposes in the elderly. Methods Inf Med 59:104–109. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1713398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Levy CE, Silverman E, Jia H et al (2015) Effects of physical therapy delivery via home video tele-rehabilitation on functional and health-related quality of life outcomes. J Rehabil Res Dev 52:361–369. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2014.10.0239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Johansson T, Wild C (2011) Tele-rehabilitation in stroke care—a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare 17:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1258/jtt.2010.100105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Sarfo FS, Ulasavets U, Opare-Sem OK et al (2018) Tele-rehabilitation after stroke: an updated systematic review of the literature. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 27:2306–2318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2018.05.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Tousignant M, Marquis N, Pagé C et al (2012) In-home tele-rehabilitation for older persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a pilot study. Int J Telerehabil 4:7–14. https://doi.org/10.5195/ijt.2012.6083

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Ortiz-Piña M, Molina-Garcia P, Femia P et al (2021) Effects of tele-rehabilitation compared with home-based in-person rehabilitation for older adult’s function after hip fracture. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18:5493. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Ware JE Jr (2000) Sf-36 health survey update. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:3130–3139. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Brooks R (1996) EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 37:53–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Haywood KL, Garratt AM, Fitzpatrick R (2005) Quality of life in older people: a structured review of generic self-assessed health instruments. Qual Life Res 14:1651–1668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-1743-0

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Hernandez G, Garin O, Dima AL et al (2019) EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) validity in assessing the quality of life in adults with Asthma: cross-sectional study. J Med Internet Res 21:e10178. https://doi.org/10.2196/10178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Chau JP, Lee DT, Yu DS et al (2012) A feasibility study to investigate the acceptability and potential effectiveness of a telecare service for older people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Int J Med Inform 81:674–682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2012.06.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Bujnowska-Fedak MM, Grata-Borkowska U (2015) Use of telemedicine-based care for the aging and elderly: promises and pitfalls. Smart Homecare Technol Telehealth 3:91–105. https://doi.org/10.2147/SHTT.S59498

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was funded and supported by the Health Management and Economics Research Center, Health Management Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran (99-3-48-19090).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Information Management, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Maryam Eslami Jahromi

  2. Health Management and Economics Research Center, Health Management Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

    Haleh Ayatollahi

Authors
  1. Maryam Eslami Jahromi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haleh Ayatollahi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haleh Ayatollahi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Statement of human and animals rights

This study was performed in line with the principles of the declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the National Ethics Committee of Biomedical Research (IR.IUMS.REC.1399.1267).

Informed consent

No human participants or animals were involved in this study.

Protocol registration

The study protocol was registered in INPLASY, an international platform for registration of systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (Registration number: INPLASY202270051, DOI number: https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2022.7.0051).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 40 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eslami Jahromi, M., Ayatollahi, H. Impact of telecare interventions on quality of life in older adults: a systematic review. Aging Clin Exp Res 35, 9–21 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-022-02294-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-022-02294-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation