Why the study?
No uniform, well-validated, and comprehensive lifestyle behaviour self-assessment instrument currently exists for patients with cardiovascular disease.
Does the LifeStyleScore mobile application improve patient activation and lifestyle behaviour in patients with coronary artery disease or atrial fibrillation entering cardiac rehabilitation?
Does the LifeStyleScore mobile application improve patient activation and lifestyle behaviour in patients with coronary artery disease or atrial fibrillation entering cardiac rehabilitation?
The LifeStyleScore mobile application is usable for patients in cardiac rehabilitation but does not significantly increase patient activation.
LifeStyleScore app appears usable for CVD lifestyle assessment; leaves open effects on activation and sustained behavior change.
BACKGROUND: Currently, no uniform, well-validated and comprehensive lifestyle behaviour self-assessment instrument exists for patients with cardiovascular disease. PURPOSE: To evaluate the usability of a novel mobile application (LifeStyleScore) based on validated instruments for the assessment of cardiovascular risk behaviours. Secondly, the application's acceptance by healthcare professionals (HCPs) and its association with improved patient activation and lifestyle behaviour was evaluated. METHODS: In this single-centre, non-randomised observational pilot study, patients with coronary artery disease or atrial fibrillation entering cardiac rehabilitation (CR) completed the LifeStyleScore application, the Patient Activation Measure (PAM-13®), and the System Usability Scale (SUS) during the CR intake and after CR completion. A focus group interview was performed with the HCPs involved. RESULTS: We analysed 20 participants, 3 of whom were women, with a mean age of 61.9 ± 6.7 years. The LifeStyleScore application was rated with a SUS score above average (> 68) before (69.6 ± 13.4) and after CR (68.6 ± 15.1). All HCPs (n = 8) found the application usable. Patient activation did not increase significantly after CR compared with baseline (62.0 ± 8.6 versus 59.2 ± 9.5, respectively, p = 0.28) and only physical activity levels improved significantly (2.4 ± 0.7 (standardised score) at baseline, 2.8 ± 0.4 after CR, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The LifeStyleScore application was found to be usable for patients receiving CR. Its use did not result in increased patient activation, and of the lifestyle behaviours only physical activity levels improved. Further research is needed to evaluate how such applications can be optimally incorporated in CR programmes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goevaerts et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: