2017
DOI: 10.1177/1460458217704247
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Penn State Heart Assistant: A pilot study of a web-based intervention to improve self-care of heart failure patients

Abstract: The Penn State Heart Assistant, a web-based, tablet computer-accessed, secure application was developed to conduct a proof of concept test, targeting patient self-care activities of heart failure patients including daily medication adherence, weight monitoring, and aerobic activity. Patients (n = 12) used the tablet computer-accessed program for 30 days-recording their information and viewing a short educational video. Linear random coefficient models assessed the relationship between weight and time and exerc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
26
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
2
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A review of hospitalbased video interventions demonstrated that 61% reported a positive effect of educational videos on patient outcomes compared with control groups using 3 types of video styles: animated presentations, professionals in practice, and patient narratives [29]. Some studies have shown that online educational tools can actually improve disease outcomes such as reduced inhaler misuse in asthma patients, improved medication adherence and weight loss in heart failure patients, and higher rates of satisfactory bowel preparation for colonoscopy patients [24,[30][31][32]. Patient educational videos can also reduce patient anxiety about medical treatments and help patients to feel better prepared for medical treatment such as in prostate cancer radiotherapy [33,34].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A review of hospitalbased video interventions demonstrated that 61% reported a positive effect of educational videos on patient outcomes compared with control groups using 3 types of video styles: animated presentations, professionals in practice, and patient narratives [29]. Some studies have shown that online educational tools can actually improve disease outcomes such as reduced inhaler misuse in asthma patients, improved medication adherence and weight loss in heart failure patients, and higher rates of satisfactory bowel preparation for colonoscopy patients [24,[30][31][32]. Patient educational videos can also reduce patient anxiety about medical treatments and help patients to feel better prepared for medical treatment such as in prostate cancer radiotherapy [33,34].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two studies conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) [27,39], of which 1 [27] described the study protocol only. In addition, 8 studies were pilot studies [28][29][30][31][32][40][41][42], 6 studies were feasibility studies [33][34][35][36][37][38], 1 was an intervention study [43], and 1 was a cohort study using qualitative and quantitative methods [44]. As shown in Multimedia Appendix 3, primary outcomes were measured and the results were reported in 1 RCT [39], 1 intervention study [43], 5 pilot studies [30,31,[40][41][42], and 2 feasibility studies [34,36].…”
Section: Characteristics Of the Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, 8 studies were pilot studies [28][29][30][31][32][40][41][42], 6 studies were feasibility studies [33][34][35][36][37][38], 1 was an intervention study [43], and 1 was a cohort study using qualitative and quantitative methods [44]. As shown in Multimedia Appendix 3, primary outcomes were measured and the results were reported in 1 RCT [39], 1 intervention study [43], 5 pilot studies [30,31,[40][41][42], and 2 feasibility studies [34,36]. A total of 7 studies [30,34,[39][40][41][42][43] investigated the results statistically, of which 5 studies [31,34,39,40,43] reported significant positive effects on health literacy [34,39,43], and health-related measures (eg, physical activity, body weight) [30,41].…”
Section: Characteristics Of the Included Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a systematic review of co-designed mHealth interventions, studies included patients in the development stages, but none assessed the intervention's effectiveness afterwards [31]. Conversely, in another study, users evaluated the interventions usability, but were not involved in its design [32]. The lack of fluidity between mHealth development and user input reduces end-user empowerment and overall app usability.…”
Section: Creating a User-centered Design: Isr And End-user Co-designmentioning
confidence: 99%