Why the study?
Maintaining adherence to long-term lifestyle changes in heart failure patients is challenging, highlighting the need to evaluate mobile health educational interventions initiated during hospitalization through the hospital-to-home transition.
Do mobile health interventions reduce readmissions and mortality in heart failure patients during the hospital-to-home transition?
Do mobile health interventions reduce readmissions and mortality in heart failure patients during the hospital-to-home transition?
Mobile health interventions initiated during the hospital-to-home transition reduce mortality in heart failure patients, despite not significantly reducing 30-day readmissions.
Supports mHealth to reduce mortality during HF transitions; extends RCT evidence but leaves readmission and QoL benefits open for longer trials.
Maintaining adherence to a long-term lifestyle in heart failure patients is challenging, highlighting the importance of mobile health educational interventions from hospitalization to discharge. This study assessed the effects of mobile health interventions on heart failure patients during the transition from hospital to home through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus. Studies with mobile health interventions starting postdischarge were excluded. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations strategy were used to assess bias. The results indicated that mobile health interventions were not effective in reducing readmissions compared with conventional management after 30 days (relative risk, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.24). No improvements were found in quality of life or self-care. However, a reduction in mortality was observed (relative risk, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.9). The study showed that mobile health interventions can reduce mortality in heart failure patients and may reduce late readmissions and improve quality of life over a period longer than 6 months. Longer follow-up studies are necessary.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saldaña et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: