Key result
This is a protocol for a systematic review aiming to evaluate the effectiveness of smartphone-based mHealth modalities compared to conventional cardiac rehabilitation; no results are available.
Why the study?
Home-based cardiac rehabilitation requires patient self-management skills to change behaviors, and smartphones offer mHealth modalities whose comparative effectiveness remains to be identified.
Does mHealth through smartphone functionalities improve exercise capacity, quality of life, and patient compliance in adults with coronary artery disease or heart failure compared to conventional cardiac rehabilitation?
Systematic Review
Does mHealth through smartphone functionalities improve exercise capacity, quality of life, and patient compliance in adults with coronary artery disease or heart failure compared to conventional cardiac rehabilitation?
This is a protocol for a systematic review evaluating the effectiveness of smartphone-based mHealth interventions for home-based cardiac rehabilitation in patients with coronary artery disease or heart failure.
mHealth smartphone modalities may enhance home-based CR adherence and outcomes; extends Level 1 evidence for remote delivery but requires RCT confirmation before broad adoption.
Background Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of mortality worldwide, requiring support to manage symptoms and improve prognosis. Home-based cardiac rehabilitation is a realistic resource for this purpose; however, it requires patient's self-management skills in order to change behaviors. Smartphones are considered mHealth technology and have the potential to provide modalities for cardiac rehabilitation. This systematic review aims to examine these modalities and identify the most effective for improving exercise capacity, quality of life, and patient compliance. Methods Randomized controlled trials (1994 to 2022) performed with adults with coronary artery disease (post-myocardial infarction, angina, post-coronary artery bypass graft surgery) or heart failure eligible for home-based cardiac rehabilitation (mHealth) will be selected. Studies published in English, Spanish, or Portuguese language comparing rehabilitation-specific mobile apps or smartphone-based features with conventional cardiac rehabilitation will be included. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, LILACS, PEDro, grey literature, and ongoing or recently completed studies. Data and risk of bias will be accessed, and, if appropriate, a meta-analysis will be carried out. Ethics and dissemination No ethical considerations are necessary, as the results of the systematic review will be based on previously published studies. The dissemination plan of this study aims to encourage health professionals and government policies, through results disclosure in conferences and manuscripts publication.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paiva et al. (2023) conducted a systematic review in Coronary artery disease or heart failure. mHealth technology (rehabilitation-specific mobile apps or smartphone-based features) vs. Conventional cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on Exercise capacity, quality of life, and patient compliance. This is a protocol for a systematic review aiming to evaluate the effectiveness of smartphone-based mHealth modalities compared to conventional cardiac rehabilitation; no results are available.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: