Journal of cardiopulmonary rehabilitation and prevention · 2023
A Mobile Health Behavior Change Intervention for Women With Coronary Heart Disease: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED PILOT STUDY.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Beckie Theresa M, Sengupta Avijit, Dey Arup Kanti, Dutta Kaushik, Ji Ming, Chellappan Sriram
Аннотация
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.
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.