Theresa M Beckie, Avijit Sengupta, Arup Kanti Dey, Kaushik Dutta, Ming Ji, Sriram Chellappan
{"title":"针对女性冠心病患者的移动健康行为改变干预:随机对照试验研究。","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":" ","pages":"40-48"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":\" \",\"pages\":\"40-48\"},\"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}","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
摘要
目的:本研究旨在评估移动健康(mHealth)干预HerBeat与教育性常规护理(E-UC)相比,对改善冠心病女性患者3个月后的运动能力(EC)和其他患者报告结果的影响:妇女被随机分配到HerBeat组(n = 23),这是一种使用智能手机、智能手表和健康指导员的行为改变移动医疗干预措施;或E-UC组(n = 24),该组接受标准化的心脏康复工作手册。主要终点是通过6分钟步行测试(6MWT)测量心血管疾病的发病率。次要结果包括心血管疾病风险因素和社会心理健康:共有 47 名女性(年龄为 61.2 ± 9.1 岁)接受了随机分组。从基线到 3 个月期间,HerBeat 组的 6MWT 成绩明显提高(P = .016,d = .558),而 E-UC 组没有提高(P = .894,d =-0.030)。组间 3 个月时 38 米的差异无统计学意义。从基线到 3 个月,HerBeat 组在焦虑 ( P = .021)、饮食习惯自信 ( P = .028)、慢性病管理自我效能 ( P = .001)、舒张压 ( P = .03)、总体健康感知 ( P = .047)、身体疼痛感知 ( P = .02) 和腰围 ( P = .008) 方面有所改善,而 E-UC 组在任何结果上都没有改善:结论:从基线到 3 个月期间,移动保健干预改善了心电图和几项次要结果,而电子尿路造影干预则没有。需要进行更大规模的研究来检测组间的微小差异。HerBeat干预的实施和结果评估是可行和可接受的,自然减员极少。
A Mobile Health Behavior Change Intervention for Women With Coronary Heart Disease: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED PILOT STUDY.
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.