Theresa M Beckie, Avijit Sengupta, Arup Kanti Dey, Kaushik Dutta, Ming Ji, Sriram Chellappan
{"title":"A Mobile Health Behavior Change Intervention for Women With Coronary Heart Disease: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED PILOT STUDY.","authors":"Theresa M Beckie, Avijit Sengupta, Arup Kanti Dey, Kaushik Dutta, Ming Ji, Sriram Chellappan","doi":"10.1097/HCR.0000000000000804","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a mobile health (mHealth) intervention, HerBeat, compared with educational usual care (E-UC) for improving exercise capacity (EC) and other patient-reported outcomes at 3 mo among women with coronary heart disease.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Women were randomized to the HerBeat group (n = 23), a behavior change mHealth intervention with a smartphone, smartwatch, and health coach or to the E-UC group (n = 24) who received a standardized cardiac rehabilitation workbook. The primary endpoint was EC measured with the 6-min walk test (6MWT). Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular disease risk factors and psychosocial well-being.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 47 women (age 61.2 ± 9.1 yr) underwent randomization. The HerBeat group significantly improved on the 6MWT from baseline to 3 mo ( P = .016, d = .558) while the E-UC group did not ( P = .894, d =-0.030). The between-group difference of 38 m at 3 mo was not statistically significant. From baseline to 3 mo, the HerBeat group improved in anxiety ( P = .021), eating habits confidence ( P = .028), self-efficacy for managing chronic disease ( P = .001), diastolic blood pressure ( P = .03), general health perceptions ( P = .047), perceived bodily pain ( P = .02), and waist circumference ( P = .008) while the E-UC group showed no improvement on any outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The mHealth intervention led to improvements in EC and several secondary outcomes from baseline to 3 mo while the E-UC intervention did not. A larger study is required to detect small differences between groups. The implementation and outcomes evaluation of the HerBeat intervention was feasible and acceptable with minimal attrition.</p>","PeriodicalId":15192,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HCR.0000000000000804","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a mobile health (mHealth) intervention, HerBeat, compared with educational usual care (E-UC) for improving exercise capacity (EC) and other patient-reported outcomes at 3 mo among women with coronary heart disease.
Methods: Women were randomized to the HerBeat group (n = 23), a behavior change mHealth intervention with a smartphone, smartwatch, and health coach or to the E-UC group (n = 24) who received a standardized cardiac rehabilitation workbook. The primary endpoint was EC measured with the 6-min walk test (6MWT). Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular disease risk factors and psychosocial well-being.
Results: A total of 47 women (age 61.2 ± 9.1 yr) underwent randomization. The HerBeat group significantly improved on the 6MWT from baseline to 3 mo ( P = .016, d = .558) while the E-UC group did not ( P = .894, d =-0.030). The between-group difference of 38 m at 3 mo was not statistically significant. From baseline to 3 mo, the HerBeat group improved in anxiety ( P = .021), eating habits confidence ( P = .028), self-efficacy for managing chronic disease ( P = .001), diastolic blood pressure ( P = .03), general health perceptions ( P = .047), perceived bodily pain ( P = .02), and waist circumference ( P = .008) while the E-UC group showed no improvement on any outcomes.
Conclusions: The mHealth intervention led to improvements in EC and several secondary outcomes from baseline to 3 mo while the E-UC intervention did not. A larger study is required to detect small differences between groups. The implementation and outcomes evaluation of the HerBeat intervention was feasible and acceptable with minimal attrition.
期刊介绍:
JCRP was the first, and remains the only, professional journal dedicated to improving multidisciplinary clinical practice and expanding research evidence specific to both cardiovascular and pulmonary rehabilitation. This includes exercise testing and prescription, behavioral medicine, and cardiopulmonary risk factor management. In 2007, JCRP expanded its scope to include primary prevention of cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases. JCRP publishes scientific and clinical peer-reviewed Original Investigations, Reviews, and Brief or Case Reports focused on the causes, prevention, and treatment of individuals with cardiovascular or pulmonary diseases in both a print and online-only format. Editorial features include Editorials, Invited Commentaries, Literature Updates, and Clinically-relevant Topical Updates. JCRP is the official Journal of the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Canadian Association of Cardiac Rehabilitation.