Web-Based Training and Telephone Follow-up of Patients With Heart Failure: Randomized Controlled Trial

Platform-Based Patient-Clinician Digital Health Interventions for Care Transitions: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Care transitions are complex and can make patients vulnerable to adverse events. Poor communication among clinicians, patients, and their caregivers is a critical gap during these periods of transition. Technology solutions such as platform-based patient-clinician digital health interventions (DHIs) can provide support and education to patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this scoping review were to explore the literature on platform-based patient-clinician DHIs specific to hospital-to-home care transitions and identify the barriers to and enablers of the uptake and implementation of these DHIs.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted. A total of 4 databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched on July 13, 2022. Studies involving patients aged >18 years who used platform-based DHIs during their hospital-to-home transition were included. In total, 2 reviewers independently screened the articles for eligibility using a 2-stage process of title and abstract and full-text screening. Eligible studies underwent data extraction, and the results were analyzed using descriptive and narrative methods.

RESULTS

We screened 8322 articles, of which 97 (1.17%) met our inclusion criteria. DHIs were implemented using a mobile app (59/97, 61%), a web-based platform (28/97, 29%), or a combination of both (10/97, 10%). The 2 most common health conditions related to the DHIs were cardiac disease (22/97, 23%) and stroke (11/97, 11%). Outcomes varied greatly but were grouped by health care use, complications, and wellness outcomes. The top 2 barriers were lack of interest (13/97, 13%) and time constraints to use the DHIs (10/97, 10%), and the top 2 enablers were the ability to use the DHIs (17/97, 18%) and their ease of use (11/97, 11%). The main conflicting theme was access (enabler; 28/97, 29%) or limited access (barrier; 15/97, 15%) to technology or the internet.

CONCLUSIONS

Platform-based DHIs could help improve communication, coordination, and information sharing between clinicians and patients during transition periods. Further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of these platform-based DHIs on patient outcomes.

Pal J, Safa Erenay F. Medical Informatics as a Concept and Field-Based Medical Informatics Research: The Case of Turkey

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the position of Turkey in the field of Medical Informatics and assess the general structure of research by analyzing Medical Informatics research with bibliometric methods. Material and Methods: In this study, we conducted a bibliometric analysis of research and review articles generated between 1980 and 2023 from the Web of Science bibliometric data source, utilizing bibliometric methods through the R bibliometrix tool and VosViewer. Results: In the field of medical informatics research in Turkey, the country holds the 27th position with 905 articles, 15,610 citations, and an impressive impact factor of 51, along with an average citation rate of 17.25 per article, based on bibliometric analysis conducted between 1980 and 2023. Notable institutions in this field include Middle East Technical University, Hacettepe University, and Selçuk University. The prominent research topics encompass "neural network(s), machine learning, support vector, health care, decision support, deep learning, EEG signals, classification accuracy," reflecting the areas of intensive investigation. Conclusion: In Turkey, the field of medical informatics has lagged slightly behind basic engineering sciences or medical sciences. The domain exhibits a multidisciplinary structure intersecting with various engineering fields such as computer science, software engineering, industrial engineering, artificial intelligence engineering, and electronic engineering. To enhance productivity in this field, greater collaboration with other research areas can be pursued. Additionally, it is recommended to urgently establish four-year undergraduate programs specifically dedicated to medical informatics or health informatics at universities.

Effects of nurse-led self-care interventions on health outcomes among people with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To estimate the effects of nurse-led self-care interventions on people with heart failure (HF).

BACKGROUND

Research evidence of the effects of nurse-led HF self-care interventions on patient outcomes is scant.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

Six databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsycINFO) were searched from the inception to December 2022 to identify eligible studies.

METHODS

RCTs published in English that evaluated the impact of nurse-led HF self-care interventions on quality of life, anxiety, symptom burden, sleep quality, healthcare service utilisation and mortality were included. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed using RoB 2.0. We conducted data syntheses using the R software and graded the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies with 2746 subjects were included. Our findings demonstrated, that compared to the controls, nurse-led self-care interventions improved QOL (SMD: .83, 95% CI: .50-1.15, moderate evidence), anxiety (MD: 1.39, 95% CI: .49-2.29, high evidence) and symptom burden (SMD: .81, 95% CI: .24-1.38, low evidence) in people with HF. No significant effects were found in all-cause hospital readmission and all-cause emergency department visit. Research evidence on sleep quality, cardiac-related hospital readmission, cardiac-related emergency department visit and all-cause mortality remained unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review suggests that nurse-led HF self-care interventions have favourable effects on the QOL, anxiety and symptom burden. Further, well-designed RCTs are warranted to address the gaps identified in this review.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The results indicated that nurse-led HF self-care interventions could improve QOL, anxiety and symptom burden in people with HF. Nurse-led self-care intervention could be integrated into current HF management practices.

Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death globally. Traditionally, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes are offered to individuals after cardiac events to aid recovery and prevent further cardiac illness. Home-based and technology-supported cardiac rehabilitation programmes have been introduced in an attempt to widen access and participation, especially during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009, 2015, and 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of home-based (which may include digital/telehealth interventions) and supervised centre-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality and morbidity, exercise-capacity, health-related quality of life, and modifiable cardiac risk factors in patients with heart disease SEARCH METHODS: We updated searches from the previous Cochrane Review by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL (EBSCO) on 16 September 2022. We also searched two clinical trials registers as well as previous systematic reviews and reference lists of included studies. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared centre-based cardiac rehabilitation (e.g. hospital, sports/community centre) with home-based programmes (± digital/telehealth platforms) in adults with myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, or who had undergone revascularisation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all identified references for inclusion based on predefined inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through discussion or by involving a third review author. Two authors independently extracted outcome data and study characteristics and assessed risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three new trials in this update, bringing a total of 24 trials that have randomised a total of 3046 participants undergoing cardiac rehabilitation. A further nine studies were identified and are awaiting classification. Manual searching of trial registers until 16 September 2022 revealed a further 14 clinical trial registrations - these are ongoing. Participants had a history of acute myocardial infarction, revascularisation, or heart failure. Although there was little evidence of high risk of bias, a number of studies provided insufficient detail to enable assessment of potential risk of bias; in particular, details of generation and concealment of random allocation sequencing and blinding of outcome assessment were poorly reported. No evidence of a difference was seen between home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in our primary outcomes up to 12 months of follow-up: total mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65 to 2.16; participants = 1647; studies = 12/comparisons = 14; low-certainty evidence) or exercise capacity (standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.10, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.04; participants = 2343; studies = 24/comparisons = 28; low-certainty evidence). The majority of evidence (N=71 / 77 comparisons of either total or domain scores) showed no significant difference in health-related quality of life up to 24 months follow-up between home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Trials were generally of short duration, with only three studies reporting outcomes beyond 12 months (exercise capacity: SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.23; participants = 1074; studies = 3; moderate-certainty evidence). There was a similar level of trial completion (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.08; participants = 2638; studies = 22/comparisons = 26; low-certainty evidence) between home-based and centre-based participants. The cost per patient of centre- and home-based programmes was similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update supports previous conclusions that home- (± digital/telehealth platforms) and centre-based forms of cardiac rehabilitation formally supported by healthcare staff seem to be similarly effective in improving clinical and health-related quality of life outcomes in patients after myocardial infarction, or revascularisation, or with heart failure. This finding supports the continued expansion of healthcare professional supervised home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes (± digital/telehealth platforms), especially important in the context of the ongoing global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic that has much limited patients in face-to-face access of hospital and community health services. Where settings are able to provide both supervised centre- and home-based programmes, consideration of the preference of the individual patient would seem appropriate. Although not included in the scope of this review, there is an increasing evidence base supporting the use of hybrid models that combine elements of both centre-based and home-based cardiac rehabilitation delivery. Further data are needed to determine: (1) whether the short-term effects of home/digital-telehealth and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation models of delivery can be confirmed in the longer term; (2) the relative clinical effectiveness and safety of home-based programmes for other heart patients, e.g. post-valve surgery and atrial fibrillation.