Why the study?
Heart failure mHealth lacks evidence of efficacy, caregiver involvement, and clinically useful real-time data.
While health care providers see potential value in heart failure mHealth technologies, they remain skeptical about the clinical utility of real-time patient-reported outcomes.
Provider perspectives on HF mHealth may inform dyad-focused app design; leaves open whether such tools improve outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Many mobile health (mHealth) technologies exist for patients with heart failure (HF). However, HF mhealth lacks evidence of efficacy, caregiver involvement, and clinically useful real-time data. OBJECTIVE: We aim to capture health care providers' perceived value of HF mHealth, particularly for pairing patient-caregiver-generated data with clinical intervention to inform the design of future HF mHealth. METHODS: This study is a subanalysis of a larger qualitative study based on interviewing patients with HF, their caregivers, and health care providers. This analysis included interviews with health care providers (N=20), focusing on their perceived usefulness of HF mHealth tools and interventions. RESULTS: A total of 5 themes emerged: (1) bio-psychosocial-spiritual monitoring, (2) use of sensors, (3) interoperability, (4) data sharing, and (5) usefulness of patient-reported outcomes in practice. Providers remain interested in mHealth technologies for HF patients and their caregivers. However, providers report being unconvinced of the clinical usefulness of robust real-time patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of assessments, sensors, and real-time data collection could provide value in patient care. Future research must continually explore how to maximize the utility of mHealth for HF patients, their caregivers, and health care providers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Portz et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: