Key result
Mobile health cardiac rehab fails to improve 6-minute walk distance over usual care.
Why the study?
Traditional cardiac rehabilitation participation remains low among older adults with ischemic heart disease, and while mobile health cardiac rehabilitation offers alternative care delivery, age-specific barriers exist and efficacy data are lacking.
Does mobile health cardiac rehabilitation (mHealth-CR) improve functional capacity measured by 6-minute walk distance at 3 months compared with usual care in older adults aged 65 years or older hospitalized for ischemic heart disease?
RCT (n=400)
Open-label with blinded assessment of the primary end point
3:1 permuted block randomization with variable block sizes of 4 and 8
Yes
Does mobile health cardiac rehabilitation (mHealth-CR) improve functional capacity measured by 6-minute walk distance at 3 months compared with usual care in older adults aged 65 years or older hospitalized for ischemic heart disease?
In older adults hospitalized for ischemic heart disease, a 3-month mobile health cardiac rehabilitation program did not significantly improve 6-minute walk distance or secondary health status outcomes compared with usual care, suggesting that more age-tailored digital strategies are needed for this population.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Does not support routine mHealth cardiac rehabilitation in older adults with ischemic heart disease; challenges efficacy assumptions and leaves open need for age-tailored digital strategies.
Importance: Among older adults with ischemic heart disease, participation in traditional ambulatory cardiac rehabilitation (CR) remains low. While mobile health CR (mHealth-CR) provides a novel opportunity to deliver care, age-specific impairments to technology use may limit uptake, and efficacy data are currently lacking. Objective: To test whether mHealth-CR improves functional capacity in older adults. Design, Setting, and Participants: The RESILIENT phase 2, multicenter, randomized clinical trial recruited patients aged 65 years or older with ischemic heart disease (defined as a hospital visit for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization) from 5 academic hospitals in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts between January 9, 2020, and April 22, 2024. Intervention: Participants were randomized 3:1 to mHealth-CR or usual care. mHealth-CR consisted of commercially available software delivered on a tablet computer, coupled with remote monitoring and weekly exercise therapist telephone calls, delivered over a 3-month duration. As RESILIENT was a trial conducted in a routine care setting to inform decision-making, participants in both arms were also allowed to receive traditional CR at their cardiologist's discretion. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change from baseline to 3 months in functional capacity, measured by 6-minute walk distance (6MWD). Secondary outcomes were health status (12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12]), residual angina, and impairment in activities of daily living. Results: A total of 400 participants (median age, 71.0 years [range, 65.0-91.0 years]; 291 [72.8%] male) were randomized to mHealth-CR (n = 298) or usual care (n = 102) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Of those, 356 participants (89.0%) returned in person for 6MWD assessment at 3 months. For the primary outcome, there was no adjusted difference in 6MWD between participants receiving mHealth-CR vs usual care (15.6 m; 95% CI, -0.3 to 31.5 m; P = .06). Among subgroups, there was an improvement in 6MWD among women (36.6 m; 95% CI, 8.7-64.4 m). There were no differences in any secondary outcomes between groups (eg, adjusted difference in SF-12 physical component scores at 3 months: -1.9 points; 95% CI, -3.9 to 0.2 points). Based on inverse propensity score weighting, there was no effect of mHealth-CR on 6MWD among those who did not attend traditional CR (25.7 m; 95% CI, -8.7 to 60.2 m). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of mHealth-CR vs usual care, mHealth-CR did not significantly increase 6MWD or result in improvements in secondary outcomes. The findings suggest the older adult population may require more age-tailored mHealth strategies to effectively improve outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03978130.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dodson et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in Ischemic heart disease (acute myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization) (n=400). Mobile health cardiac rehabilitation (mHealth-CR) vs. Usual care (both arms permitted to attend traditional ambulatory CR at cardiologist's discretion) was evaluated on Change from baseline to 3 months in functional capacity measured by 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) (MD 15.6 m, 95% CI -0.3 to 31.5, p=0.06). Mobile health cardiac rehabilitation did not significantly improve 3-month 6-minute walk distance compared with usual care in older adults with ischemic heart disease (MD 15.6 m, P = 0.06).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: