Monitoring Patients Reported Outcomes After Valve Replacement Using Wearable Devices: Insights on Feasibility and Capability Study: Feasibility Results

Overview

Journal Int J Environ Res Public Health

Publisher MDPI

Specialties Environmental Health
Public Health

Date 2021 Jul 20

PMID 34281108

Citations 7

Authors

Honoria Ocagli

Giulia Lorenzoni

Corrado Lanera

Alessandro Schiavo

Livio DAngelo

Alessandro Di Liberti

Laura Besola

Giorgia Cibin

Matteo Martinato

Danila Azzolina

Augusto DOnofrio

Giuseppe Tarantini

Gino Gerosa

Ester Cabianca

Dario Gregori

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Wearable devices (WDs) can objectively assess patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) in clinical trials. In this study, the feasibility and acceptability of using commercial WDs in elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) will be explored. This is a prospective observational study. Participants were trained to use a WD and a smartphone to collect data on their physical activity, rest heart rate and number of hours of sleep. Validated questionnaires were also used to evaluate these outcomes. A technology acceptance questionnaire was used at the end of the follow up. In our participants an overall good compliance in wearing the device (75.1% vs. 79.8%, SAVR vs. TAVR) was assessed. Half of the patients were willing to continue using the device. Perceived ease of use is one of the domains that scored higher in the technology acceptance questionnaire. In this study we observed that the use of a WD is accepted in our frail population for an extended period. Even though commercial WDs are not tailored for clinical research, they can produce useful information on patient behavior, especially when coordinated with intervention tailored to the single patient.

Citing Articles

Digital Health Technologies in Pediatric Infectious Disease and the Perspective of Patients and Healthcare Professionals: A Review.

Saji A, Komel A, Khan M, Niraula S, Naeem B, Ahsan A Health Sci Rep. 2025; 8(3):e70514.

PMID: 40041773 PMC: 11872690. DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.70514.

Implementing sensor-based digital health technologies in clinical trials: Key considerations from the eCOA Consortium.

Izmailova E, Middleton D, Yunis R, Lakeland J, Sowalsky K, Kling J Clin Transl Sci. 2024; 17(11):e70054.

PMID: 39491883 PMC: 11532371. DOI: 10.1111/cts.70054.

Percutaneous Valvular and Structural Heart Disease Interventions. 2024 Core Curriculum of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC in collaboration with the European Association of Cardiovascular....

Teles R, Van Belle E, Parma R, Tarantini G, van Mieghem N, Mylotte D EuroIntervention. 2024; .

PMID: 39207816 PMC: 11556405. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00983.

Ambulatory Smartwatch ECG Monitoring among Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Early after Discharge: An Observational Study.

Zhang Y, Xiong T, Yang X, Chen D, Li Y, Bao Y Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 24(1):11.

PMID: 39076857 PMC: 11270444. DOI: 10.31083/j.rcm2401011.

Effective health management strategies for patients undergoing valve replacement: a bibliometric analysis of the current research status and future directions.

Wang X, Wu Y, Li M, Wen J, Liu L, Huang W Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024; 11:1352437.

PMID: 38476380 PMC: 10929617. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1352437.

References

Chandrasekaran R, Katthula V, Moustakas E . Patterns of Use and Key Predictors for the Use of Wearable Health Care Devices by US Adults: Insights from a National Survey. J Med Internet Res. 2020; 22(10):e22443. PMC: 7600024. DOI: 10.2196/22443. View

MAHONEY F, BARTHEL D . FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION: THE BARTHEL INDEX. Md State Med J. 1965; 14:61-5. View

Kononova A, Li L, Kamp K, Bowen M, Rikard R, Cotten S . The Use of Wearable Activity Trackers Among Older Adults: Focus Group Study of Tracker Perceptions, Motivators, and Barriers in the Maintenance Stage of Behavior Change. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019; 7(4):e9832. PMC: 6473213. DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.9832. View

Hlatky M, Boineau R, Higginbotham M, Lee K, Mark D, Califf R . A brief self-administered questionnaire to determine functional capacity (the Duke Activity Status Index). Am J Cardiol. 1989; 64(10):651-4. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(89)90496-7. View

Byrom B, Watson C, Doll H, Coons S, Eremenco S, Ballinger R . Selection of and Evidentiary Considerations for Wearable Devices and Their Measurements for Use in Regulatory Decision Making: Recommendations from the ePRO Consortium. Value Health. 2018; 21(6):631-639. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.09.012. View

Lawton M, Brody E . Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969; 9(3):179-86. View

Ribeiro G, Melo R, Deresz L, Lago P, Pontes M, Karsten M . Cardiac rehabilitation programme after transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017; 24(7):688-697. DOI: 10.1177/2047487316686442. View

Henriksen A, Sand A, Deraas T, Grimsgaard S, Hartvigsen G, Hopstock L . Succeeding with prolonged usage of consumer-based activity trackers in clinical studies: a mixed methods approach. BMC Public Health. 2020; 20(1):1300. PMC: 7457262. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09406-w. View

Puri A, Kim B, Nguyen O, Stolee P, Tung J, Lee J . User Acceptance of Wrist-Worn Activity Trackers Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Mixed Method Study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017; 5(11):e173. PMC: 5707431. DOI: 10.2196/mhealth.8211. View

10.

Liu Z, Kidney E, Bem D, Bramley G, Bayliss S, de Belder M . Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for aortic stenosis in high surgical risk patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018; 13(5):e0196877. PMC: 5944928. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0196877. View

11.

Kim D, Afilalo J, Shi S, Popma J, Khabbaz K, Laham R . Evaluation of Changes in Functional Status in the Year After Aortic Valve Replacement. JAMA Intern Med. 2019; 179(3):383-391. PMC: 6439710. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.6738. View

12.

Mok M, Nombela-Franco L, Dumont E, Urena M, DeLarochelliere R, Doyle D . Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insights on clinical outcomes, prognostic markers, and functional status changes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013; 6(10):1072-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.06.008. View

13.

Levett J, Windle S, Filion K, Brunetti V, Eisenberg M . Meta-Analysis of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Surgical Risk Patients. Am J Cardiol. 2020; 125(8):1230-1238. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.01.017. View

14.

Martinato M, Lorenzoni G, Zanchi T, Bergamin A, Buratin A, Azzolina D . Usability and Accuracy of a Smartwatch for the Assessment of Physical Activity in the Elderly Population: Observational Study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021; 9(5):e20966. PMC: 8135023. DOI: 10.2196/20966. View

15.

Tedesco S, Sica M, Ancillao A, Timmons S, Barton J, OFlynn B . Validity Evaluation of the Fitbit Charge2 and the Garmin vivosmart HR+ in Free-Living Environments in an Older Adult Cohort. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019; 7(6):e13084. PMC: 6607774. DOI: 10.2196/13084. View

16.

Russo N, Compostella L, Tarantini G, Setzu T, Napodano M, Bottio T . Cardiac rehabilitation after transcatheter versus surgical prosthetic valve implantation for aortic stenosis in the elderly. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2013; 21(11):1341-8. DOI: 10.1177/2047487313494029. View

17.

Deutsch M, Bleiziffer S, Elhmidi Y, Piazza N, Voss B, Lange R . Beyond adding years to life: health-related quality-of-life and functional outcomes in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at high surgical risk undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2013; 9(4):281-94. PMC: 3941091. DOI: 10.2174/1573403x09666131202121750. View

18.

Baig M, GholamHosseini H, Moqeem A, Mirza F, Linden M . A Systematic Review of Wearable Patient Monitoring Systems - Current Challenges and Opportunities for Clinical Adoption. J Med Syst. 2017; 41(7):115. DOI: 10.1007/s10916-017-0760-1. View

19.

Kekade S, Hseieh C, Islam M, Atique S, Khalfan A, Li Y . The usefulness and actual use of wearable devices among the elderly population. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2017; 153:137-159. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2017.10.008. View

20.

Brickwood K, Watson G, OBrien J, Williams A . Consumer-Based Wearable Activity Trackers Increase Physical Activity Participation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019; 7(4):e11819. PMC: 6484266. DOI: 10.2196/11819. View