Effect of telemedicine on the quality of life of people with heart disease: a systematic review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.7243.4567Keywords:
Telemedicine; Heart Diseases; Self-Management; Quality of Life; Telerehabilitation; Self CareAbstract
Objective: to synthesize the scientific evidence on the effectiveness of telemedicine-based interventions in improving health-related quality of life and self-management of patients with heart disease. Method: systematic review of effectiveness, following the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute and the reporting guideline Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Checklist. The search was conducted in six databases: Cochrane Library, Virtual Health Library, PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection and Scopus, without period restriction, in English, Portuguese or Spanish. The methodological quality and risk of bias of the studies were assessed using the JBI critical appraisal tool and the certainty of the evidence was classified using the GRADE tool. Results: of the 44 randomized clinical trials included, the main interventions analyzed were telemonitoring, telephone contact and telerehabilitation. Out of the studies evaluated, 88.63% demonstrated an improvement in health-related quality of life, with 45.45% of these showing a statistically significant difference. Conclusion: telemedicine shows promise as a valuable tool for the care and self-management of individuals with cardiac conditions. However, further studies are needed to confirm its effectiveness and impact on health outcomes.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.
