A pilot study examining activity monitor use in older adults with heart failure during and after hospitalization

Floegel, Theresa A.; Allen, Kelli D.; Buman, Matthew P.

doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2018.10.001

Cited by 6 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Devices were attached to 11 different anatomical sites on the body (Table 4 ), of which the wrist was the most common site (43.2%; n = 16) [ 37 – 39 , 41 , 43 , 49 – 51 , 54 , 56 – 58 , 61 , 69 – 71 ], followed by the waist or lower back (27.1%; n = 10) [ 36 , 38 – 40 , 46 , 55 , 56 , 58 , 61 , 67 ]. With regards to the method of attachment, eight different methods were used (Table 4 ) of which straps (45.9%; n = 17) [ 35 – 41 , 43 , 46 , 47 , 49 , 54 , 57 – 61 , 70 ] and clips were the most commonly used (16.2%; n = 6) [ 45 , 52 , 56 , 62 , 64 , 65 ]. Nine studies failed to report how the wearable was attached to the body (24.3%) [ 42 , 45 , 48 , 50 , 51 , 55 , 63 , 68 , 69 ], while four failed to report where they were attached (10.8%) [ 42 , 63 , 65 , 68 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the usability of wearable devices to measure gait and physical activity in chronic conditions: a systematic review

Keogh

Argent

Anderson

et al. 2021

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The World Health Organisation’s global strategy for digital health emphasises the importance of patient involvement. Understanding the usability and acceptability of wearable devices is a core component of this. However, usability assessments to date have focused predominantly on healthy adults. There is a need to understand the patient perspective of wearable devices in participants with chronic health conditions. Methods A systematic review was conducted to identify any study design that included a usability assessment of wearable devices to measure mobility, through gait and physical activity, within five cohorts with chronic conditions (Parkinson’s disease [PD], multiple sclerosis [MS], congestive heart failure, [CHF], chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder [COPD], and proximal femoral fracture [PFF]). Results Thirty-seven studies were identified. Substantial heterogeneity in the quality of reporting, the methods used to assess usability, the devices used, and the aims of the studies precluded any meaningful comparisons. Questionnaires were used in the majority of studies (70.3%; n = 26) with a reliance on intervention specific measures (n = 16; 61.5%). For those who used interviews (n = 17; 45.9%), no topic guides were provided, while methods of analysis were not reported in over a third of studies (n = 6; 35.3%). Conclusion Usability of wearable devices is a poorly measured and reported variable in chronic health conditions. Although the heterogeneity in how these devices are implemented implies acceptance, the patient voice should not be assumed. In the absence of being able to make specific usability conclusions, the results of this review instead recommends that future research needs to: (1) Conduct usability assessments as standard, irrespective of the cohort under investigation or the type of study undertaken. (2) Adhere to basic reporting standards (e.g. COREQ) including the basic details of the study. Full copies of any questionnaires and interview guides should be supplied through supplemental files. (3) Utilise mixed methods research to gather a more comprehensive understanding of usability than either qualitative or quantitative research alone will provide. (4) Use previously validated questionnaires alongside any intervention specific measures.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the usability of wearable devices to measure gait and physical activity in chronic conditions: a systematic review

Keogh

Argent

Anderson

et al. 2021

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Participants Most studies concerned general acute medical patients ( n = 11, mean sample size 114, range 16–287). Five studies were exclusively concerned with patients with specific conditions; two each reported physical activity levels of patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (mean sample size 13.5, range 10–17) [ 30 , 32 ], and heart failure (mean sample size 36, range 27–45) [ 33 , 35 ] and whilst one reported on patients with mixed medical conditions plus mild-moderate cognitive impairment (sample size 20) [ 34 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the physical activity levels of acutely ill older adults in Hospital At Home settings: an under-researched field

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this review was to identify, evaluate and synthesise existing evidence reporting the physical activity levels of acutely ill older patients in a ‘Hospital At Home’ setting and compare this to patients with similar characteristics treated in a traditional hospital inpatient setting. Functional changes and any adverse outcomes due to physical activity (e.g. falls) in both settings where PA was reported or recorded were also evaluated as secondary outcomes. Methods A search strategy was devised for the MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMed, PEDRO, OT Seeker and Cochrane databases. Search results were title, abstract and full-text reviewed by two independent researchers. Data were extracted from included articles using a custom form and assessed for quality and risk of bias using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-Sectional Studies. Results No studies set in the Hospital at Home environments were identified. 16 hospital inpatient studies met the criteria for inclusion. Older patients managed in inpatient settings that would be eligible for Hospital at Home services spent 6.6% of their day active and undertook only 881.8 daily steps. Functional change was reported in four studies with both improvement and decline during admission reported. Conclusion There is a lack of published research on the physical activity levels of acutely-ill older adults in Hospital at Home settings. This review has identified a baseline level of activity for older acutely ill patients that would be suitable for Hospital at Home treatment. This data could be used as a basis of comparison in future hospital at home studies, which should also include functional change outcomes to further explore the relationship between physical inactivity and functional decline.

show abstract

“…Although not required in a meta-ethnography, we assessed study quality to facilitate the critical reading of each study to gauge its potential contribution to the analysis (see Table S2 in Multimedia Appendix 1 [9,[13][14][15][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44] for the checklist). We used the Evaluation Tool for Qualitative Studies (ETQS) [45], as this provides detailed instructions on applying the evaluation criteria, unlike the CASP (Critical Appraisals Skills Programme) tool [46,47].…”

Section: Data Extraction and Quality Appraisalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the 20 included records, 2 evaluated fall detection devices [14,29], 1 tested an ankle-worn step counter [30], and the remaining 17 examined wrist-worn activity trackers. The duration of use ranged from 3 days to 24 months.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In others, participants were randomly assigned to one of several devices [34,35]. The views of 349 participants (age: range 51-94 years) were synthesized, including those with previous breast cancer [32], obesity [36,37], resolving heart failure [30,37], Parkinson disease [38], dementia [15,39], and walking aids [9,29] and those who were fully independent and healthy [9,13,14,29,[31][32][33][34][35]37,[40][41][42][43][44]. Table 1 summarizes the results of the data extraction process.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Older Adults’ Experiences With Using Wearable Devices: Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-synthesis

Moore¹,

O'Shea²,

Kenny³

et al. 2021

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Older adults may use wearable devices for various reasons, ranging from monitoring clinically relevant health metrics or detecting falls to monitoring physical activity. Little is known about how this population engages with wearable devices, and no qualitative synthesis exists to describe their shared experiences with long-term use. Objective This study aims to synthesize qualitative studies of user experience after a multi-day trial with a wearable device to understand user experience and the factors that contribute to the acceptance and use of wearable devices. Methods We conducted a systematic search in CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, PubMed, and Embase (2015-2020; English) with fixed search terms relating to older adults and wearable devices. A meta-synthesis methodology was used. We extracted themes from primary studies, identified key concepts, and applied reciprocal and refutational translation techniques; findings were synthesized into third-order interpretations, and finally, a “line-of-argument” was developed. Our overall goal was theory development, higher-level abstraction, and generalizability for making this group of qualitative findings more accessible. Results In total, we reviewed 20 papers; 2 evaluated fall detection devices, 1 tested an ankle-worn step counter, and the remaining 17 tested activity trackers. The duration of wearing ranged from 3 days to 24 months. The views of 349 participants (age: range 51-94 years) were synthesized. Four key concepts were identified and outlined: motivation for device use, user characteristics (openness to engage and functional ability), integration into daily life, and device features. Motivation for device use is intrinsic and extrinsic, encompassing many aspects of the user experience, and appears to be as, if not more, important than the actual device features. To overcome usability barriers, an older adult must be motivated by the useful purpose of the device. A device that serves its intended purpose adds value to the user’s life. The user’s needs and the support structure around the device—aspects that are often overlooked—seem to play a crucial role in long-term adoption. Our “line-of-argument” model describes how motivation, ease of use, and device purpose determine whether a device is perceived to add value to the user’s life, which subsequently predicts whether the device will be integrated into the user’s life. Conclusions The added value of a wearable device is the resulting balance of motivators (or lack thereof), device features (and their accuracy), ease of use, device purpose, and user experience. The added value contributes to the successful integration of the device into the daily life of the user. Useful device features alone do not lead to continued use. A support structure should be placed around the user to foster motivation, encourage peer engagement, and adapt to the user’s preferences.

show abstract

A pilot study examining activity monitor use in older adults with heart failure during and after hospitalization

Cited by 6 publications

References 15 publications

Assessing the usability of wearable devices to measure gait and physical activity in chronic conditions: a systematic review

Assessing the usability of wearable devices to measure gait and physical activity in chronic conditions: a systematic review

A systematic review of the physical activity levels of acutely ill older adults in Hospital At Home settings: an under-researched field

Older Adults’ Experiences With Using Wearable Devices: Qualitative Systematic Review and Meta-synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About