数字化心脏康复干预对危险因素、复发住院和死亡率的影响

IF 4.4 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
European heart journal. Digital health Pub Date : 2025-04-29 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1093/ehjdh/ztaf043
Justin Braver, Thomas H Marwick, Agus Salim, Dulari Hakamuwalekamlage, Catherine Keating, Stephanie R Yiallourou, Brian Oldenburg, Melinda J Carrington
{"title":"数字化心脏康复干预对危险因素、复发住院和死亡率的影响","authors":"Justin Braver, Thomas H Marwick, Agus Salim, Dulari Hakamuwalekamlage, Catherine Keating, Stephanie R Yiallourou, Brian Oldenburg, Melinda J Carrington","doi":"10.1093/ehjdh/ztaf043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes are effective, but they are underutilized. Digitally enabled CR programmes (DeCR) offer alternative means of healthcare delivery. We aimed to assess the effects of a DeCR programme on cardiovascular risk factors and healthcare utilization.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>In this observational cohort study that used propensity score matching, privately insured Australian patients, recruited nationally following a cardiac hospitalization, were given a digital app and received weekly telehealth consultations. Risk factors were assessed before and after the intervention. Propensity scoring methods were used to compare differences in 30-day, 90-day, and 12-month rehospitalizations, hospital-days, and mortality rates in the DeCR group with patients who undertook: (i) usual care (<i>n</i> = 266) or (ii) face-to-face CR (F2F-CR, <i>n</i> = 115). Overall, 172 intervention patients (70% men, age 68 ± 10 years, 36% living in regional/remote areas) were enrolled (59% agreed to participate and 91% completed final follow-up). The DeCR group had significant improvements in most risk factors. Rehospitalization and mortality rates were similar between the DeCR group and both comparison groups at all time points (all <i>P</i> > 0.05). Patients in the DeCR group spent significantly fewer days in hospital compared with usual care within 30-days (<i>P</i> = 0.026), 90-days (<i>P</i> = 0.003), and 12-months (<i>P</i> = 0.04) post-discharge. Cardiac-related rehospitalization bed days were reduced at 30-days (<i>P</i> = 0.005) and 90-days (<i>P</i> = 0.017) but not 12-months (<i>P</i> = 0.20). There were no group differences between DeCR and F2F-CR across any outcomes (all <i>P</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DeCR was associated with lower healthcare utilization than usual care, yet comparable compared with F2F-CR. DeCR represents a suitable option for cardiac patients post-discharge.</p><p><strong>Lay summary: </strong>We investigated whether a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation (DeCR) programme, delivered to patients following a heart disease hospitalization, improved patients' cardiovascular disease risk factors and whether they had a reduction in rehospitalizations, spent fewer days in hospital and improved survival compared with matched controls who undertook either face-to-face cardiac rehabilitation (F2F-CR) or usual care.• DeCR was associated with similar healthcare utilization outcomes compared with F2F-CR. This suggests that the potential benefits of DeCR may be comparable. Additionally, DeCR programmes create an opportunity for patients to choose the style of CR to undertake and have an advantage of broader access.• The DeCR group spent significantly fewer readmission days in hospital compared with the usual care group, which may reflect differences in the nature of rehospitalizations when they occur.</p>","PeriodicalId":72965,"journal":{"name":"European heart journal. Digital health","volume":"6 4","pages":"688-703"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12282376/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation intervention on risk factors, recurrent hospitalization and mortality.\",\"authors\":\"Justin Braver, Thomas H Marwick, Agus Salim, Dulari Hakamuwalekamlage, Catherine Keating, Stephanie R Yiallourou, Brian Oldenburg, Melinda J Carrington\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ehjdh/ztaf043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes are effective, but they are underutilized. Digitally enabled CR programmes (DeCR) offer alternative means of healthcare delivery. We aimed to assess the effects of a DeCR programme on cardiovascular risk factors and healthcare utilization.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>In this observational cohort study that used propensity score matching, privately insured Australian patients, recruited nationally following a cardiac hospitalization, were given a digital app and received weekly telehealth consultations. Risk factors were assessed before and after the intervention. Propensity scoring methods were used to compare differences in 30-day, 90-day, and 12-month rehospitalizations, hospital-days, and mortality rates in the DeCR group with patients who undertook: (i) usual care (<i>n</i> = 266) or (ii) face-to-face CR (F2F-CR, <i>n</i> = 115). Overall, 172 intervention patients (70% men, age 68 ± 10 years, 36% living in regional/remote areas) were enrolled (59% agreed to participate and 91% completed final follow-up). The DeCR group had significant improvements in most risk factors. Rehospitalization and mortality rates were similar between the DeCR group and both comparison groups at all time points (all <i>P</i> > 0.05). Patients in the DeCR group spent significantly fewer days in hospital compared with usual care within 30-days (<i>P</i> = 0.026), 90-days (<i>P</i> = 0.003), and 12-months (<i>P</i> = 0.04) post-discharge. Cardiac-related rehospitalization bed days were reduced at 30-days (<i>P</i> = 0.005) and 90-days (<i>P</i> = 0.017) but not 12-months (<i>P</i> = 0.20). There were no group differences between DeCR and F2F-CR across any outcomes (all <i>P</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DeCR was associated with lower healthcare utilization than usual care, yet comparable compared with F2F-CR. DeCR represents a suitable option for cardiac patients post-discharge.</p><p><strong>Lay summary: </strong>We investigated whether a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation (DeCR) programme, delivered to patients following a heart disease hospitalization, improved patients' cardiovascular disease risk factors and whether they had a reduction in rehospitalizations, spent fewer days in hospital and improved survival compared with matched controls who undertook either face-to-face cardiac rehabilitation (F2F-CR) or usual care.• DeCR was associated with similar healthcare utilization outcomes compared with F2F-CR. This suggests that the potential benefits of DeCR may be comparable. Additionally, DeCR programmes create an opportunity for patients to choose the style of CR to undertake and have an advantage of broader access.• The DeCR group spent significantly fewer readmission days in hospital compared with the usual care group, which may reflect differences in the nature of rehospitalizations when they occur.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European heart journal. Digital health\",\"volume\":\"6 4\",\"pages\":\"688-703\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12282376/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European heart journal. Digital health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztaf043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European heart journal. Digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjdh/ztaf043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:心脏康复(CR)方案是有效的,但它们没有得到充分利用。数字化的社会责任项目(DeCR)提供了另一种医疗保健服务方式。我们的目的是评估DeCR项目对心血管危险因素和医疗保健利用的影响。方法和结果:在这项使用倾向评分匹配的观察性队列研究中,在心脏病住院治疗后,在全国范围内招募私人保险的澳大利亚患者,给他们一个数字应用程序,并接受每周的远程医疗咨询。在干预前后评估危险因素。采用倾向评分方法比较DeCR组患者30天、90天和12个月再住院、住院天数和死亡率的差异:(i)常规护理(n = 266)或(ii)面对面CR (F2F-CR, n = 115)。总共纳入172例干预患者(70%为男性,年龄68±10岁,36%生活在地区/偏远地区)(59%同意参加,91%完成最终随访)。DeCR组在大多数危险因素上有显著改善。在所有时间点,DeCR组与对照组的再住院率和死亡率相似(P < 0.05)。DeCR组患者出院后30天(P = 0.026)、90天(P = 0.003)和12个月(P = 0.04)住院天数明显少于常规护理组。心脏相关的再住院天数在30天(P = 0.005)和90天(P = 0.017)时减少,但在12个月时没有减少(P = 0.20)。DeCR和F2F-CR在任何结果上均无组间差异(均P < 0.05)。结论:与常规护理相比,DeCR与较低的医疗保健利用率相关,但与F2F-CR相当。DeCR是心脏病患者出院后的合适选择。摘要:我们调查了与接受面对面心脏康复(F2F-CR)或常规护理的对照组相比,向心脏病住院患者提供数字化心脏康复(DeCR)计划是否改善了患者的心血管疾病危险因素,以及他们是否减少了再住院、住院天数减少和生存率提高。•与F2F-CR相比,DeCR与类似的医疗保健利用结果相关。这表明DeCR的潜在益处可能是可比的。此外,DeCR项目为患者选择进行CR的方式创造了机会,并具有更广泛的优势。•与常规护理组相比,DeCR组的再入院天数明显减少,这可能反映了再住院发生时性质的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Effects of a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation intervention on risk factors, recurrent hospitalization and mortality.

Effects of a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation intervention on risk factors, recurrent hospitalization and mortality.

Effects of a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation intervention on risk factors, recurrent hospitalization and mortality.

Effects of a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation intervention on risk factors, recurrent hospitalization and mortality.

Aims: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes are effective, but they are underutilized. Digitally enabled CR programmes (DeCR) offer alternative means of healthcare delivery. We aimed to assess the effects of a DeCR programme on cardiovascular risk factors and healthcare utilization.

Methods and results: In this observational cohort study that used propensity score matching, privately insured Australian patients, recruited nationally following a cardiac hospitalization, were given a digital app and received weekly telehealth consultations. Risk factors were assessed before and after the intervention. Propensity scoring methods were used to compare differences in 30-day, 90-day, and 12-month rehospitalizations, hospital-days, and mortality rates in the DeCR group with patients who undertook: (i) usual care (n = 266) or (ii) face-to-face CR (F2F-CR, n = 115). Overall, 172 intervention patients (70% men, age 68 ± 10 years, 36% living in regional/remote areas) were enrolled (59% agreed to participate and 91% completed final follow-up). The DeCR group had significant improvements in most risk factors. Rehospitalization and mortality rates were similar between the DeCR group and both comparison groups at all time points (all P > 0.05). Patients in the DeCR group spent significantly fewer days in hospital compared with usual care within 30-days (P = 0.026), 90-days (P = 0.003), and 12-months (P = 0.04) post-discharge. Cardiac-related rehospitalization bed days were reduced at 30-days (P = 0.005) and 90-days (P = 0.017) but not 12-months (P = 0.20). There were no group differences between DeCR and F2F-CR across any outcomes (all P > 0.05).

Conclusion: DeCR was associated with lower healthcare utilization than usual care, yet comparable compared with F2F-CR. DeCR represents a suitable option for cardiac patients post-discharge.

Lay summary: We investigated whether a digitally enabled cardiac rehabilitation (DeCR) programme, delivered to patients following a heart disease hospitalization, improved patients' cardiovascular disease risk factors and whether they had a reduction in rehospitalizations, spent fewer days in hospital and improved survival compared with matched controls who undertook either face-to-face cardiac rehabilitation (F2F-CR) or usual care.• DeCR was associated with similar healthcare utilization outcomes compared with F2F-CR. This suggests that the potential benefits of DeCR may be comparable. Additionally, DeCR programmes create an opportunity for patients to choose the style of CR to undertake and have an advantage of broader access.• The DeCR group spent significantly fewer readmission days in hospital compared with the usual care group, which may reflect differences in the nature of rehospitalizations when they occur.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信