Skip to main content
. 2022 May 6;8(1):e002290. doi: 10.1136/rmdopen-2022-002290

Table 4.

Characteristics of studies

PICO 1 (value of remote care) PIO 3 (drivers and barriers)
N° of studies 34 (100) 13 (100)
 RCTs 26 (77) 0 (0)
 Cohort studies 7 (21) 1 (8)
 Cross-sectional studies 1 (3) 7 (54)
 Qualitative studies 0 (0) 5 (39)
Inflammatory RMDs and mixed diagnoses* 14 (41) 10 (77)
 RA 7 (21) 6 (46)
 SpA 3 (9)
 Inflammatory arthritis 3 (9)
 SLE 3 (9)
 RMD not further specified 3 (9) 4 (31)
Non-inflammatory RMDs 20 (59) 3 (23)
 OA 11 (32) 3 (23)
 FM 2 (6) 0 (0)
 Back pain 5 (15) 0 (0)
 Osteoporosis 2 (6) 0 (0)
Remote care intervention†
 Remote monitoring 32 (94) 3 (23)
 Remote diagnostics 2 (6) 0 (0)
Mode of delivering remote care†
 E-device for monitoring 10 (29) 0 (0)
 Video/Telephone calls 27 (79) 3 (23)

Values are depicted as total number and percentage in parenthesis.

*In some studies, multiple RMDs were investigated.

†Some studies assessed multiple types of remote care intervention/mode of delivery.

FM, fibromyalgia; OA, osteoarthritis; PICO, Patients, Intervention, Comparator or Control, Outcome; PIO, Patients, Intervention, Outcome; RA, rheumatoid arthritis; RCT, randomised controlled trial; RMD, rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease; SLE, systematic lupus erythematosus; SpA, spondyloarthritis.