Why the study?
Geriatric conditions affect outcomes in older patients with cardiovascular disease but are not systematically assessed during clinical visits due to time constraints.
Remote monitoring of geriatric conditions using a smartphone app and wearable device is feasible in older patients with atrial fibrillation, though adherence declines over 6 months.
Supports short-term feasibility of app-based geriatric monitoring in older AF patients; leaves open sustained adherence and outcome impact.
BackgroundGeriatric conditions (eg, cognitive impairment, frailty) are increasingly recognized for their impact on clinical and quality-of-life outcomes in older patients with cardiovascular disease, but are not systematically assessed in the context of clinical visits owing to time constraints.ObjectiveTo examine feasibility of remote monitoring of the physical, cognitive, and psychosocial status of older adults with atrial fibrillation (AF) via a novel smartphone app over 6 months.MethodsForty participants with AF and eligible for anticoagulation therapy (CHA2DS2VASc ≥2) enrolled in an ongoing cohort study participated in a mobile health pilot study. A 6-component geriatric assessment, including validated measures of frailty, cognitive function, social support, depressive symptoms, vision, and hearing, was deployed via a smartphone app and 6-minute walk test was completed using a Fitbit. Adherence to mobile assessments was examined over 6 months.ResultsParticipants were an average of 71 years old (range 65–86 years) and 38% were women. At 1 month, 75% (30/40) of participants completed the app-based geriatric assessment and 63% (25/40) completed the 6-minute walk test. At 6 months, 52% (15/29) completed the geriatric assessment and 28% (8/29) completed the walk test. There were no differences in demographic, clinical, or psychosocial factors between participants who completed the surveys at 6 months and those who did not. Participants, on average, required less than 10 minutes of telephone support over the 6-month period.ConclusionIt is feasible, among smartphone users, to use a mobile health app and wearable activity monitor to conduct serial geriatric assessments in older patients with AF for up to 6 months. Geriatric conditions (eg, cognitive impairment, frailty) are increasingly recognized for their impact on clinical and quality-of-life outcomes in older patients with cardiovascular disease, but are not systematically assessed in the context of clinical visits owing to time constraints. To examine feasibility of remote monitoring of the physical, cognitive, and psychosocial status of older adults with atrial fibrillation (AF) via a novel smartphone app over 6 months. Forty participants with AF and eligible for anticoagulation therapy (CHA2DS2VASc ≥2) enrolled in an ongoing cohort study participated in a mobile health pilot study. A 6-component geriatric assessment, including validated measures of frailty, cognitive function, social support, depressive symptoms, vision, and hearing, was deployed via a smartphone app and 6-minute walk test was completed using a Fitbit. Adherence to mobile assessments was examined over 6 months. Participants were an average of 71 years old (range 65–86 years) and 38% were women. At 1 month, 75% (30/40) of participants completed the app-based geriatric assessment and 63% (25/40) completed the 6-minute walk test. At 6 months, 52% (15/29) completed the geriatric assessment and 28% (8/29) completed the walk test. There were no differences in demographic, clinical, or psychosocial factors between participants who completed the surveys at 6 months and those who did not. Participants, on average, required less than 10 minutes of telephone support over the 6-month period. It is feasible, among smartphone users, to use a mobile health app and wearable activity monitor to conduct serial geriatric assessments in older patients with AF for up to 6 months.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Trymbulak et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: