Effects of Accessible Health Technology and Caregiver Support Posthospitalization on 30-Day Readmission Risk: A Randomized Trial

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regardless of their duration of follow-up, and included those reported as full text, published as abstract only, and unpublished data.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.

Systematic Review of Dyadic Interventions for Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions: Current Evidence and Key Gaps

OBJECTIVES

Identify non-pharmacological interventions to support patient/caregiver dyads with ACSCs; review the effects of dyadic interventions on health services outcomes; and review the effectiveness of dyadic interventions on patient and caregiver biopsychosocial outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS

Twenty-six manuscripts representing 20 unique RCTs (Mean N = 154 patients, 140 caregivers) were eligible. Eleven RCTs examined caregiving in patients with HF, seven with T2DM, one with COPD, and one with mixed ACSCs. Dyadic interventions for ACSCs were diverse in terms of length and content, with most including an educational component. Only 4/26 included studies had a low risk of bias. Interventions were most successful at improving quality of life, clinical health outcomes, health behaviors, and health services outcomes, with fewer improvements in patient mental health outcomes, psychosocial outcomes, relationship outcomes, and caregiver outcomes in general. The largest effect sizes were reported from trials focused on T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality research with consistent measuring instruments is needed to understand which interventions are associated with improved patient and caregiver outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

There may be clinically relevant benefits to including caregivers in interventions for patients with ACSCs, and clinicians should consider this when devising treatment plans.

Recommendations for the Design and Delivery of Transitions-Focused Digital Health Interventions: Rapid Review

Background

Older adults experience a high risk of adverse events during hospital-to-home transitions. Implementation barriers have prevented widespread clinical uptake of the various digital health technologies that aim to support hospital-to-home transitions.

Objective

To guide the development of a digital health intervention to support transitions from hospital to home (the Digital Bridge intervention), the specific objectives of this review were to describe the various roles and functions of health care providers supporting hospital-to-home transitions for older adults, allowing future technologies to be more targeted to support their work; describe the types of digital health interventions used to facilitate the transition from hospital to home for older adults and elucidate how these interventions support the roles and functions of providers; describe the lessons learned from the design and implementation of these interventions; and identify opportunities to improve the fit between technology and provider functions within the Digital Bridge intervention and other transition-focused digital health interventions.

Methods

This 2-phase rapid review involved a selective review of providers’ roles and their functions during hospital-to-home transitions (phase 1) and a structured literature review on digital health interventions used to support older adults’ hospital-to-home transitions (phase 2). During the analysis, the technology functions identified in phase 2 were linked to the provider roles and functions identified in phase 1.

Results

In phase 1, various provider roles were identified that facilitated hospital-to-home transitions, including navigation-specific roles and the roles of nurses and physicians. The key transition functions performed by providers were related to the 3 categories of continuity of care (ie, informational, management, and relational continuity). Phase 2, included articles (n=142) that reported digital health interventions targeting various medical conditions or groups. Most digital health interventions supported management continuity (eg, follow-up, assessment, and monitoring of patients’ status after hospital discharge), whereas informational and relational continuity were the least supported. The lessons learned from the interventions were categorized into technology- and research-related challenges and opportunities and informed several recommendations to guide the design of transition-focused digital health interventions.

Conclusions

This review highlights the need for Digital Bridge and other digital health interventions to align the design and delivery of digital health interventions with provider functions, design and test interventions with older adults, and examine multilevel outcomes.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045596

Caregiver autonomy support: A systematic review of interventions for adults with chronic illness and their caregivers with narrative synthesis

Chronic illnesses cause significant mortality in adults. Caregivers (spouses, adult children, friends) support adults with chronic illness in multiple ways, for instance through support of their autonomous decisions about how and why to engage in self-care.

AIM

To examine interventions designed to improve the health and well-being of adults with chronic illness by enhancing the autonomy supportive behaviours of caregivers.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials with narrative synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

All available dates of publication through August 2020 conducted in PubMed, Medline, Ageline, PsychInfo, and CINAHL.

METHODS

Randomized controlled interventions of adults with chronic illness and their caregivers with content to enhance caregiver autonomy support were included. Interventions involving healthcare personnel, adults without self-care capacity, or not published in English were excluded. Quality was appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute recommendations. Common themes in autonomy support and associated outcomes (e.g., self-care, social support) were synthesized.

RESULTS

Search identified 1,426 studies with 16 included in review (N = 2,486 dyads). Methodological quality was moderate. Successful interventions were skills-based, targeted various communication styles, contained in-person elements, and involved nurses. Half of the interventions assessed autonomy support outcomes; 63% (5 of 8) of these improved autonomy support. Results were generally positive for social support, mixed for self-care, and null for caregiver burden. Heterogeneity and complexity of studies limited attribution of effects.

CONCLUSION

Behavioural interventions designed to enhance dyadic caregiver interpersonal communication to be autonomy supportive may positively influence caregiver skills and chronic illness outcomes. Future studies of autonomy support are needed to identify core intervention components.

IMPACT

This is the first systematic review examining interventions promoting caregiver to care-receiver autonomy support. Modifying interpersonal communication to be autonomy supportive has potential to improve chronic illness outcomes. Findings can inform how clinicians and investigators enlist caregiver autonomy support to encourage behaviour change.