journal contributionposted on 14.01.2019 by Meredith Achey, Ryan Korn, Abigail Arky, E. Ray Dorsey, Christopher A. Beck, Kevin Biglan, E. Anna Stevenson, William Zhu, Jennifer R. Mammen, Molly Elson
Any type of content formally published in an academic journal, usually following a peer-review process.
We randomized 159 individuals with Parkinson disease, and 111 of their care partners participated. Most study participants were white (96%) and college educated (73%), and on average were 66 years old. Those randomized to the treatment and control group were comparable except for in their previous use of participating in a video chat: Those in the control group had more previous experience (62% versus 435; p = 0.012). Of the 97 individuals randomized to the treatment group, 95 (98%) completed at least 1 virtual house call, and 84 (87%) completed all 4 recommended virtual house calls. Quality of life did not improve in those receiving virtual house calls (0.3 points worse on a 100-point scale; 95% CI –2.0 to +2.7 points; p = 0.78), nor did the change in quality of care or caregiver burden. Each virtual house call saved patients a median of 80 minutes (95% CI 70 – 120; p < 0.0001) and 38 miles per visit (95% CI 36-56; p < 0.0001). Participants were highly satisfied with the care, convenience, and comfort of virtual house calls. Parkinson disease–related quality of life did not change appreciably over the course of the study in either group. The Patient Global Impression of Change did improve over 12 months in those randomized to virtual house calls (50% versus 32% randomized to the control group reported feeling at least “a little better”; p = 0.002).