Dataset Information

The Atrial Fibrillation Health Literacy Information Technology System: Pilot Assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a highly prevalent heart rhythm condition that has significant associated morbidity and requires chronic treatment. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies have the potential to enhance multiple aspects of AF care, including education, monitoring of symptoms, and encouraging and tracking medication adherence. We have previously implemented and tested relational agents to improve outcomes in chronic disease and sought to develop a smartphone-based relational agent for improving patient-centered outcomes in AF.

Objective

The objective of this study was to pilot a smartphone-based relational agent as preparation for a randomized clinical trial, the Atrial Fibrillation Health Literacy Information Technology Trial (AF-LITT).

Methods

We developed the relational agent for use by a smartphone consistent with our prior approaches. We programmed the relational agent as a computer-animated agent to simulate a face-to-face conversation and to serve as a health counselor or coach specific to AF. Relational agent's dialogue content, informed by a review of literature, focused on patient-centered domains and qualitative interviews with patients with AF, encompassed AF education, common symptoms, adherence challenges, and patient activation. We established that the content was accessible to individuals with limited health or computer literacy. Relational agent content coordinated with use of the smartphone AliveCor Kardia heart rate and rhythm monitor. Participants (N=31) were recruited as a convenience cohort from ambulatory clinical sites and instructed to use the relational agent and Kardia for 30 days. We collected demographic, social, and clinical characteristics and conducted baseline and 30-day assessments of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of life (AFEQT) measure; self-reported medication adherence with the Morisky 8-item Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8); and patient activation with the Patient Activation Measure (PAM).

Results

Participants (mean age 68 [SD 11]; 39% [12/31] women) used the relational agent for an average 17.8 (SD 10.0) days. The mean number of independent log-ins was 19.6 (SD 10.7), with a median of 20 times over 30 days. The mean number of Kardia uses was 26.5 (SD 5.9), and participants using Kardia were in AF for 14.3 (SD 11.0) days. AFEQT scores improved significantly from 64.5 (SD 22.9) at baseline to 76.3 (SD 19.4) units at 30 days (P<.01). We observed marginal but statistically significant improvement in self-reported medication adherence (baseline: 7.3 [SD 0.9], 30 days: 7.7 [SD 0.5]; P=.01). Assessments of acceptability identified that most of the participants found the relational agent useful, informative, and trustworthy.

Conclusions

We piloted a 30-day smartphone-based intervention that combined a relational agent with dedicated content for AF alongside Kardia heart rate and rhythm monitoring. Pilot participants had favorable improvements in HRQoL and self-reported medication adherence, as well as positive responses to the intervention. These data will guide a larger, enhanced randomized trial implementing the smartphone relational agent and the Kardia monitor system.

SUBMITTER: Magnani JW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5818980 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAtrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia that adversely affects health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We conducted a pilot trial of individuals with AF using a smartphone to provide a relational agent as well as rhythm monitoring. We employed our pilot to measure acceptability and adherence and to assess its effectiveness in improving HRQoL and adherence.ObjectiveThis study aims to measure acceptability and adherence and to assess its effectiveness to improve HRQoL and adherence.MethodsParticipants were recruited from ambulatory clinics and randomized to a 30-day intervention or usual care. We collected baseline characteristics and conducted baseline and 30-day assessments of HRQoL using the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT) measure and self-reported adherence to anticoagulation. The intervention consisted of a smartphone-based relational agent, which simulates face-to-face counseling and delivered content on AF education, adherence, and symptom monitoring with prompted rhythm monitoring. We compared differences in AFEQT and adherence at 30 days, adjusted for baseline values. We quantified participants' use and acceptability of the intervention.ResultsA total of 120 participants were recruited and randomized (59 to control and 61 to intervention) to the pilot trial (mean age 72.1 years, SD 9.10; 62/120, 51.7% women). The control group had a 95% follow-up, and the intervention group had a 93% follow-up. The intervention group demonstrated significantly higher improvement in total AFEQT scores (adjusted mean difference 4.5; 95% CI 0.6-8.3; P=.03) and in daily activity (adjusted mean difference 7.1; 95% CI 1.8-12.4; P=.009) compared with the control between baseline and 30 days. The intervention group showed significantly improved self-reported adherence to anticoagulation therapy at 30 days (intervention 3.5%; control 23.2%; adjusted difference 16.6%; 95% CI 2.8%-30.4%; P<.001). Qualitative assessments of acceptability identified that participants found the relational agent useful, informative, and trustworthy.ConclusionsIndividuals randomized to a 30-day smartphone intervention with a relational agent and rhythm monitoring showed significant improvement in HRQoL and adherence. Participants had favorable acceptability of the intervention with both objective use and qualitative assessments of acceptability.

Project description:BackgroundThe increasing amount of health information available on the internet makes it more important than ever to ensure that people can judge the accuracy of this information to prevent them from harm. It may be possible for platforms to set up protective mechanisms depending on the level of digital health literacy and thereby to decrease the possibility of harm by the misuse of health information.ObjectiveThis study aimed to create an instrument for digital health literacy assessment (DHLA) based on the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) to categorize participants by level of risk of misinterpreting health information into high-, medium-, and low-risk groups.MethodsThis study developed a DHLA and constructed an online health information bank with correct and incorrect answers. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to detect the cutoff value of DHLA, using 5 items randomly selected from the online health information bank, to classify users as being at low, medium, or high risk of misjudging health information. This provided information about the relationship between risk group for digital health literacy and accurate judgement of online health information. The study participants were Taiwanese residents aged 20 years and older. Snowball sampling was used, and internet questionnaires were anonymously completed by the participants. The reliability and validity of DHLA were examined. Logistic regression was used to analyze factors associated with risk groups from the DHLA.ResultsThis study collected 1588 valid questionnaires. The online health information bank included 310 items of health information, which were classified as easy (147 items), moderate (122 items), or difficult (41 items) based on the difficulty of judging their accuracy. The internal consistency of DHLA was satisfactory (α=.87), and factor analysis of construct validity found three factors, accounting for 76.6% of the variance. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis found 106 people at high risk, 1368 at medium risk, and 114 at low risk of misinterpreting health information. Of the original grouped cases, 89.6% were correctly classified after discriminate analysis. Logistic regression analysis showed that participants with a high risk of misjudging health information had a lower education level, lower income, and poorer health. They also rarely or never browsed the internet. These differences were statistically significant.ConclusionsThe DHLA score could distinguish those at low, medium, and high risk of misjudging health information on the internet. Health information platforms on the internet could consider incorporating DHLA to set up a mechanism to protect users from misusing health information and avoid harming their health.

Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer is the second most common type of cancer in Canadian men. Radical prostatectomy is one of the treatment options available, and involves removing the prostate gland and surrounding tissues. In recent years, surgeons have begun to use robot-assisted radical prostatectomy more frequently. We aimed to determine the clinical benefits and harms of the robotic surgical system for radical prostatectomy (robot-assisted radical prostatectomy) compared with the open and laparoscopic surgical methods. We also assessed the cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer in Ontario.MethodsWe performed a literature search and included prospective comparative studies that examined robot-assisted versus open or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. The outcomes of interest were perioperative, functional, and oncological. The quality of the body of evidence was examined according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We also conducted a cost-utility analysis with a 1-year time horizon. The potential long-term benefits of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for functional and oncological outcomes were also evaluated in a 10-year Markov model in scenario analyses. In addition, we conducted a budget impact analysis to estimate the additional costs to the provincial budget if the adoption of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy were to increase in the next 5 years. A needs assessment determined that the published literature on patient perspectives was relatively well developed, and that direct patient engagement would add relatively little new information.ResultsCompared with the open approach, we found robot-assisted radical prostatectomy reduced length of stay and blood loss (moderate quality evidence) but had no difference or inconclusive results for functional and oncological outcomes (low to moderate quality evidence). Compared with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy had no difference in perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes (low to moderate quality evidence). Compared with open radical prostatectomy, our best estimates suggested that robot-assisted prostatectomy was associated with higher costs ($6,234) and a small gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (0.0012). The best estimate of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $5.2 million per QALY gained. However, if robot-assisted radical prostatectomy were assumed to have substantially better long-term functional and oncological outcomes, the ICER might be as low as $83,921 per QALY gained. We estimated the annual budget impact to be $0.8 million to $3.4 million over the next 5 years.ConclusionsThere is no high-quality evidence that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy improves functional and oncological outcomes compared with open and laparoscopic approaches. However, compared with open radical prostatectomy, the costs of using the robotic system are relatively large while the health benefits are relatively small.