The Danish Future Patient Telerehabilitation Program for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Design and Pilot Study in Collaboration With Patients and Their Spouses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is predicted to more than double in prevalence over the next 20 years. Tailored patient education is recommended as an important aspect of AF care. Current guidelines emphasize that patients become more active participants in the management of their own disease, yet there are no rehabilitation programs for patients with AF in the Danish health care system. Through participatory design, we developed the Future Patient Telerehabilitation (TR) Programs, A and B, for patients with AF. The 2 programs are based on HeartPortal and remote monitoring, together with educational modules. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this pilot study is to evaluate and compare the feasibility of the 2 programs of TR for patients with AF. METHODS: This pilot study was conducted between December 2019 and March 2020. The pilot study consisted of testing the 2 TR programs, A and B, in two phases: (1) treatment at the AF clinic and (2) TR at home. The primary outcome of the study was the usability of technologies for self-monitoring and the context of the TR programs as seen from patients' perspectives. Secondary outcomes were the development of patients' knowledge of AF, development of clinical data, and understanding the expectations and experiences of patients and spouses. Data were collected through interviews, questionnaires, and clinical measurements from home monitoring devices. Statistical analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS Statistics version 26. Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo 12.0. RESULTS: Through interviews, patients articulated the following themes about participating in a TR program: usefulness of the HeartPortal, feeling more secure living with AF, community of practice living with AF, and measuring heart rhythm makes good sense. Through interviews, the spouses of patients with AF expressed that they had gained increased knowledge about AF and how to support their spouses living with AF in everyday life. Results from the responses to the Jessa AF Knowledge Questionnaire support the qualitative data, as they showed that patients in program B acquired increased knowledge about AF at follow-up compared with baseline. No significant differences were found in the number of electrocardiography recordings between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AF and their spouses were positive about the TR program and they found the TR program useful, especially because it created an increased sense of security, knowledge about mastering their symptoms, and a community of practice linking patients with AF and their spouses and health care personnel. To assess all the benefits of the Future Patient-TR Program for patients with AF, it needs to be tested in a comprehensive randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04493437; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04493437.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".