Heart up! RCT protocol to increase physical activity in cardiac patients who report hopelessness: Amended for the COVID-19 pandemic

A Mobile Health Resistance Training Intervention Using Outdoor Gym Equipment: Process Evaluation of the Ecofit Effectiveness Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Few mobile health resistance-based physical activity interventions have targeted community-dwelling adults. "Ecofit" is a multicomponent intervention that promotes resistance and aerobic activities using smartphone technology, outdoor gyms, and social support. This study evaluated process evaluation outcomes of the ecofit randomized controlled trial: (1) the acceptability and usability of the ecofit smartphone app and app user workouts; (2) perceptions of factors influencing outdoor gym use; and (3) the fidelity, reach, recruitment, and dose received of the ecofit program.

METHODS

Process data were collected through program evaluation surveys at 3 months, and app usage data were collected via the intervention platform for up to 3 months. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 57% (n = 69) of eligible participants. The majority (93%) believed the app provided them with sufficient information to perform muscle-strengthening activities. Approximately half (51%) agreed that the goal-setting function encouraged them to complete their workouts, and 42% agreed that the self-assessment helped them monitor progress. "Proximity" to outdoor gyms emerged as the most important factor for choosing locations to workout (mean = 5.5, SD = 1.1). Participants logged a median of 5.5 (interquartile range = 19) workouts and 1 (interquartile range = 1) upper- and lower-body muscular fitness self-assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

The ecofit app provided participants with sufficient skills to perform unsupervised resistance training exercises using mobile health. Only half of the participants regarded self-assessments and goal setting as useful, suggesting a need for modifications to how these are implemented. Mobile health remains a promising delivery platform to promote unsupervised resistance training, although more research is needed to improve uptake.

Comorbidities are associated with state hopelessness in adults with ischemic heart disease

BACKGROUND

In adults with ischemic heart disease (IHD), comorbidities and hopelessness are independently associated with increased risk of mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if comorbidities were associated with state and trait hopelessness and explore the influence of specific conditions and hopelessness in individuals hospitalized for IHD.

METHODS

Participants completed the State-Trait Hopelessness Scale. Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores were generated from the medical record. A chi-squared test was used to examine differences in 14 diagnoses included in the CCI by CCI severity. Unadjusted and adjusted linear models were used to explore the relationship between hopelessness levels and the CCI.

RESULTS

Participants (n=132) were predominantly male (68.9%), with a mean age of 62.6 years, and majority white (97%). The mean CCI was 3.5 (range 0-14), with 36.4% having a score of 1-2 (mild), 41.2% with a score of 3-4 (moderate) and 22.7% with a score of ≥5 (severe). The CCI was positively associated with both state (β=0.03; 95% CI 0.01, 0.05; p=0.002) and trait (β=0.04; 95% CI 0.01, 0.06; p=0.007) hopelessness in unadjusted models. The relationship for state hopelessness remained significant after adjusting for multiple demographic characteristics (β=0.03; 95% CI 0.01, 0.05; p=0.02), while trait hopelessness did not. Interaction terms were evaluated, and findings did not differ by age, sex, education level, or diagnosis/type of intervention.

CONCLUSION

Hospitalized individuals with IHD with a higher number of comorbidities may benefit from targeted assessment and brief cognitive intervention to identify and ameliorate state hopelessness which has been associated with worse long-term outcomes.

Social network interventions to support cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention in the management of people with heart disease

BACKGROUND

Globally, cardiovascular diseases (CVD, that is, coronary heart (CHD) and circulatory diseases combined) contribute to 31% of all deaths, more than any other cause. In line with guidance in the UK and globally, cardiac rehabilitation programmes are widely offered to people with heart disease, and include psychosocial, educational, health behaviour change, and risk management components. Social support and social network interventions have potential to improve outcomes of these programmes, but whether and how these interventions work is poorly understood.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of social network and social support interventions to support cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention in the management of people with heart disease. The comparator was usual care with no element of social support (i.e. secondary prevention alone or with cardiac rehabilitation).  SEARCH METHODS: We undertook a systematic search of the following databases on 9 August 2022: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Web of Science. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. We reviewed the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and included primary studies, and we contacted experts to identify additional studies.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of social network or social support interventions for people with heart disease. We included studies regardless of their duration of follow-up, and included those reported as full text, published as abstract only, and unpublished data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using Covidence, two review authors independently screened all identified titles. We retrieved full-text study reports and publications marked 'included', and two review authors independently screened these, and conducted data extraction. Two authors independently assessed risk of bias, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related mortality, all-cause hospital admission, cardiovascular-related hospital admission, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured at > 12 months follow-up.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 54 RCTs (126 publications) reporting data for a total of 11,445 people with heart disease. The median follow-up was seven months and median sample size was 96 participants. Of included study participants, 6414 (56%) were male, and the mean age ranged from 48.6 to 76.3 years. Studies included heart failure (41%), mixed cardiac disease (31%), post-myocardial infarction (13%), post-revascularisation (7%), CHD (7%), and cardiac X syndrome (1%) patients. The median intervention duration was 12 weeks. We identified notable diversity in social network and social support interventions, across what was delivered, how, and by whom.  We assessed risk of bias (RoB) in primary outcomes at > 12 months follow-up as either 'low' (2/15 studies), 'some concerns' (11/15), or 'high' (2/15). 'Some concerns' or 'high' RoB resulted from insufficient detail on blinding of outcome assessors, data missingness, and absence of pre-agreed statistical analysis plans. In particular, HRQoL outcomes were at high RoB. Using the GRADE method, we assessed the certainty of evidence as low or very low across outcomes. Social network or social support interventions had no clear effect on all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.13, I2 = 40%) or cardiovascular-related mortality (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.10, I2 = 0%) at > 12 months follow-up. The evidence suggests that social network or social support interventions for heart disease may result in little to no difference in all-cause hospital admission (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.22, I2 = 0%), or cardiovascular-related hospital admission (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.10, I2 = 16%), with a low level of certainty. The evidence was very uncertain regarding the impact of social network interventions on HRQoL at > 12 months follow-up (SF-36 physical component score: mean difference (MD) 31.53, 95% CI -28.65 to 91.71, I2 = 100%, 2 trials/comparisons, 166 participants; mental component score MD 30.62, 95% CI -33.88 to 95.13, I2 = 100%, 2 trials/comparisons, 166 participants).  Regarding secondary outcomes, there may be a decrease in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure with social network or social support interventions. There was no evidence of impact found on psychological well-being, smoking, cholesterol, myocardial infarction, revascularisation, return to work/education, social isolation or connectedness, patient satisfaction, or adverse events.  Results of meta-regression did not suggest that the intervention effect was related to risk of bias, intervention type, duration, setting, and delivery mode, population type, study location, participant age, or percentage of male participants.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no strong evidence for the effectiveness of such interventions, although modest effects were identified in relation to blood pressure. While the data presented in this review are indicative of potential for positive effects, the review also highlights the lack of sufficient evidence to conclusively support such interventions for people with heart disease. Further high-quality, well-reported RCTs are required to fully explore the potential of social support interventions in this context. Future reporting of social network and social support interventions for people with heart disease needs to be significantly clearer, and more effectively theorised, in order to ascertain causal pathways and effect on outcomes.

"There is nothing better than participating in this study": Living the PAPAartis cardiovascular randomised controlled trial

Qualitative research can bring new dimensions of understanding decision-making process in clinical trials. Participating in a randomized clinical trial requires patients to accept complex information and make decisions in a context of uncertainty. It becomes especially complicated in the case of serious diseases in which the treatment itself implies unknown risks. This study examines these issues in the context of the PAPAartis randomized clinical trial, which aims to prevent spinal cord injuries that can occur as an adverse event following complex surgical repair of thoracoabdominal aneurysm. In this study, we accessed a group of 16 patients participating in the trial and, through in-depth interviews, sought to understand the decision-making process when taking part in the trial and their experience of it. Our results showed that patients participated for different reasons: due to trust in doctors, the hope of having a better treatment or for altruistic and collaborative reasons with science. Many patients felt they did not fully understand the extraneous information provided about the study and the complex nature of the procedure. Avoidance of paraplegia played a fundamental role in the decision to participate in this trial. Family support and the socioeconomic conditions of the patients influenced the recovery process after surgery.

ActiGraph and Short-term Heart Rate Variability Study Protocol: Amended for the COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

ActiGraph accelerometry is widely used in nursing research to estimate daily physical activity. Heart rate variability (HRV), a measure of autonomic modulation, can be assessed in conjunction with the ActiGraph using a Polar H7 Bluetooth heart rate monitor. There is a paucity of nursing literature to guide nurse researchers' protocol development when using the ActiGraph to assess both physical activity and short-term HRV via its Bluetooth capabilities.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to describe a standardized research ActiGraph and HRV (ActiGraph HRV) protocol for an ongoing randomized controlled trial to measure physical activity and short-term HRV in patients with ischemic heart disease who report hopelessness.

METHODS

We outline the study protocol for the standardization of reliable and rigorous physical activity and HRV data collection using the ActiGraph wGT3X-BT and Polar H7 Bluetooth heart rate monitor, and data analysis using ActiLife and Kubios software programs.

RESULTS

Sixty-four participants enrolled in the randomized controlled trial to date, and 45 (70.3%) have completed or are actively participating in the study. Heart rate variability data have been collected on 43 of the 45 participants (96%) to date. During the first data collection time point, 42 of 44 participants (95.5%) wore the ActiGraph for a minimum of 5 valid days, followed by 28 of 31 participants (90.3%) and 25 of 26 participants (96.2%) at subsequent data collection time points. The intraclass correlation for physical activity in this study is 0.95 and 0.98 for HRV.

DISCUSSION

Revisions to the protocol were successfully implemented at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic for data collection using social distancing. The protocol was additionally amended in response to an unanticipated problem with ActiGraph battery life using Bluetooth technology. Use of the ActiGraph HRV protocol has led to a reliable and rigorous measurement of physical activity and HRV for patients with ischemic heart disease who report hopelessness in this randomized controlled trial.

CONCLUSION

We provide an ActiGraph HRV protocol that can be adapted as a model in the development of ActiGraph HRV protocols for future nursing research in community and home-based settings while maximizing social distancing in the current and future pandemics.

Heart up! RCT protocol to increase physical activity in cardiac patients who report hopelessness: Amended for the COVID-19 pandemic

Hopelessness is associated with decreased physical activity (PA) and increased adverse events and death in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD). Rates of PA in patients with IHD continue to be low in both hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation and home settings. While researchers have investigated strategies to increase PA among patients with IHD, interventions to promote PA specifically in IHD patients who report hopelessness are lacking. We describe the protocol for a NIH-funded randomized controlled trial designed to establish the effectiveness of a 6-week intervention (Heart Up!) to promote increased PA in IHD patients who report hopelessness. Participants (n = 225) are randomized to one of three groups: (1) motivational social support (MSS) from a nurse, (2) MSS from a nurse plus significant other support (SOS), or (3) attention control. Aims are to: (1) test the effectiveness of 6 weeks of MSS and MSS with SOS on increasing mean minutes per day of moderate to vigorous PA; (2) determine the effects of change in moderate to vigorous PA on hopelessness; and (3) determine if perceived social support and motivation (exercise self-regulation) mediate the effects of the intervention on PA. A total of 69 participants have been enrolled to date. The protocol has been consistently and accurately used by research personnel. We address the protocol challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic and steps taken to maintain fidelity to the intervention. Findings from this study could transform care for IHD patients who report hopelessness by promoting self-management of important PA goals that can contribute to better health outcomes.