An Exercise and Educational and Self-management Program Delivered With a Smartphone App (CareHand) in Adults With Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hands: Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a prevalent autoimmune disease that usually involves problems of the hand or wrist. Current evidence recommends a multimodal therapy including exercise, self-management, and educational strategies. To date, the efficacy of this approach, as delivered using a smartphone app, has been scarcely investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the short- and medium-term efficacy of a digital app (CareHand) that includes a tailored home exercise program, together with educational and self-management recommendations, compared with usual care, for people with RA of the hands. METHODS: A single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted between March 2020 and February 2021, including 36 participants with RA of the hands (women: 22/36, 61%) from 2 community health care centers. Participants were allocated to use the CareHand app, consisting of tailored exercise programs, and self-management and monitoring tools or to a control group that received a written home exercise routine and recommendations, as per the usual protocol provided at primary care settings. Both interventions lasted for 3 months (4 times a week). The primary outcome was hand function, assessed using the Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ). Secondary measures included pain and stiffness intensity (visual analog scale), grip strength (dynamometer), pinch strength (pinch gauge), and upper limb function (shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire). All measures were collected at baseline and at a 3-month follow-up. Furthermore, the MHQ and self-reported stiffness were assessed 6 months after baseline, whereas pain intensity and scores on the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire were collected at the 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. RESULTS: =0.15) and for several of its subscales: overall hand function, work performance, pain, and satisfaction (all P<.05), with mean differences between groups for the total score of 16.86 points (95% CI 8.70-25.03) at 3 months and 17.21 points (95% CI 4.78-29.63) at 6 months. No time×group interaction was observed for the secondary measures (all P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: Adults with RA of the hands who used the CareHand app reported better results in the short and medium term for overall hand function, work performance, pain, and satisfaction, compared with usual care. The findings of this study suggest that the CareHand app is a promising tool for delivering exercise therapy and self-management recommendations to this population. Results must be interpreted with caution because of the lack of efficacy of the secondary outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04263974; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04263974. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13063-020-04713-4.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".