The Clinical Impact of Electronic Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures in the Remote Monitoring of Inflammatory Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

Abstract

ObjectiveThe inflammatory arthritides (IAs) make up a significant proportion of conditions followed up in rheumatology clinics. These patients require regular monitoring, but this is increasingly difficult with rising patient numbers and demand on clinics. Our objective is to evaluate the clinical impact of electronic patient‐reported outcome measures (ePROMs) as a digital remote‐monitoring intervention on disease activity, treatment decisions, and health care resource use in patients with IA.MethodsFive databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched, with randomized controlled trials and (nonrandomized) controlled clinical trials included, and meta‐analysis and forest plots conducted for each outcome. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias‐2 tool and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions.ResultsEight studies were included with a total of 4,473 patients, with seven studies assessing patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Compared with control, the disease activity in the ePROM group was lower (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.27 to −0.03) and rates of remission/low disease activity were higher (odds ratio1.65; 95% CI 1.02–2.68), but five of eight studies provided additional combined interventions (e.g., disease education). Fewer face to face visits were needed in the remote ePROM group (SMD −0.93; 95% CI −2.14–0.28).ConclusionMost studies were at high risk of bias with significant heterogeneity in design, but our results suggest there is an advantage in using ePROM monitoring in patients with IAs, with the potential for reduction in health care resource use without detrimental impact in disease outcomes.