Use of Mobile Apps in Heart Failure Self-management: Qualitative Study Exploring the Patient and Primary Care Clinician Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mobile apps have the potential to support patients with heart failure and facilitate disease self-management, but this area of research is recent and rapidly evolving, with inconsistent results for efficacy. So far, most of the published studies evaluated the feasibility of a specific app or assessed the quality of apps available in app stores. Research is needed to explore patients' and clinicians' perspectives to guide app development, evaluation, and implementation into models of care. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the patient and primary care clinician perspective on the facilitators and barriers to using mobile apps, as well as desired features, to support heart failure self-management. METHODS: This is a qualitative phenomenological study involving face-to-face semistructured interviews. Interviews were conducted in a general practice clinic in Sydney, Australia. Eligible participants were adult patients with heart failure and health care professionals who provided care to these patients at the clinic. Patients did not need to have previous experience using heart failure mobile apps to be eligible for this study. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using inductive thematic data analysis in NVivo 12. RESULTS: A total of 12 participants were interviewed: 6 patients (mean age 69 [SD 7.9] years) and 6 clinicians. The interviews lasted from 25 to 45 minutes. The main facilitators to the use of apps to support heart failure self-management were communication ability, personalized feedback and education, and automated self-monitoring. Patients mentioned that chat-like features and ability to share audio-visual information can be helpful for getting support outside of clinical appointments. Clinicians considered helpful to send motivational messages to patients and ask them about signs and symptoms of heart failure decompensation. Overall, participants highlighted the importance of personalization, particularly in terms of feedback and educational content. Automated self-monitoring with wireless devices was seen to alleviate the burden of tracking measures such as weight and blood pressure. Other desired features included tools to monitor patient-reported outcomes and support patients' mental health and well-being. The main barriers identified were the patients' unwillingness to engage in a new strategy to manage their condition using an app, particularly in the case of low digital literacy. However, clinicians mentioned this barrier could potentially be overcome by introducing the app soon after an exacerbation, when patients might be more willing to improve their self-management and avoid rehospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mobile apps to support heart failure self-management may be facilitated by features that increase the usefulness and utility of the app, such as communication ability in-between consultations and personalized feedback. Also important is facilitating ease of use by supporting automated self-monitoring through integration with wireless devices. Future research should consider these features in the co-design and testing of heart failure mobile apps with patients and clinicians.
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 | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".