首页> 外文期刊>JMIR mHealth and uHealth >Comparison of On-Site Versus Remote Mobile Device Support in the Framingham Heart Study Using the Health eHeart Study for Digital Follow-up: Randomized Pilot Study Set Within an Observational Study Design
【24h】

Comparison of On-Site Versus Remote Mobile Device Support in the Framingham Heart Study Using the Health eHeart Study for Digital Follow-up: Randomized Pilot Study Set Within an Observational Study Design

机译:使用Healt Eheart Digital跟进的健康Eheart学习在Framingham心脏研究中的现场与远程移动设备支持的比较:在观察研究设计中,随机试验研究设定

获取原文
       

摘要

Background New electronic cohort (e-Cohort) study designs provide resource-effective methods for collecting participant data. It is unclear if implementing an e-Cohort study without direct, in-person participant contact can achieve successful participation rates. Objective The objective of this study was to compare 2 distinct enrollment methods for setting up mobile health (mHealth) devices and to assess the ongoing adherence to device use in an e-Cohort pilot study. Methods We coenrolled participants from the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) into the FHS–Health eHeart (HeH) pilot study, a digital cohort with infrastructure for collecting mHealth data. FHS participants who had an email address and smartphone were randomized to our FHS-HeH pilot study into 1 of 2 study arms: remote versus on-site support. We oversampled older adults (age ≥65 years), with a target of enrolling 20% of our sample as older adults. In the remote arm, participants received an email containing a link to enrollment website and, upon enrollment, were sent 4 smartphone-connectable sensor devices. Participants in the on-site arm were invited to visit an in-person FHS facility and were provided in-person support for enrollment and connecting the devices. Device data were tracked for at least 5 months. Results Compared with the individuals who declined, individuals who consented to our pilot study (on-site, n=101; remote, n=93) were more likely to be women, highly educated, and younger. In the on-site arm, the connection and initial use of devices was ≥20% higher than the remote arm (mean percent difference was 25% [95% CI 17-35] for activity monitor, 22% [95% CI 12-32] for blood pressure cuff, 20% [95% CI 10-30] for scale, and 43% [95% CI 30-55] for electrocardiogram), with device connection rates in the on-site arm of 99%, 95%, 95%, and 84%. Once connected, continued device use over the 5-month study period was similar between the study arms. Conclusions Our pilot study demonstrated that the deployment of mobile devices among middle-aged and older adults in the context of an on-site clinic visit was associated with higher initial rates of device use as compared with offering only remote support. Once connected, the device use was similar in both groups.
机译:背景技术新电子队列(E-Cohort)研究设计为收集参与者数据提供资源有效的方法。目前尚不清楚如果在没有直接的情况下实施电子队员的研究,则可以实现成功的参与率。目的本研究的目的是比较2种不同的入学方法,用于建立移动健康(MHECHEATH)设备,并评估E-Cohort Pilot研究中的设备使用的持续遵守。方法采用FHS-Heart eheart学习(FHS)从FHS-Heart eheart(HEH)试验研究,带有基础设施的数字队列,用于收集MHEPHEAT数据的数字队列。使用电子邮件地址和智能手机的FHS参与者将我们的FHS-HEH试点研究分为2个研究武器中的1个:远程与现场支持。我们过度采购了老年人(≥65岁),目标是将20%的样本作为老年人纳入其中。在远程臂中,参与者收到了一封包含登记网站链接的电子邮件,并在注册时发送了4个智能手机可连接的传感器设备。邀请在现场ARM中的参与者访问一个人的FHS设施,并提供了用于登记和连接设备的人员支持。跟踪设备数据至少5个月。结果与拒绝的个人相比,个人同意我们的试验研究(现场,N = 101;遥控器,N = 93)更有可能是女性,受过高等教育和年轻人。在现场臂中,设备的连接和初始使用比远程臂高≥20%(平均值为25%[95%CI 17-35],适用于活性显示器,22%[95%CI 12- 32]对于血压箍,25%[95%CI 10-30]的规模和43%[95%CI 30-55]的心电图),在现场ARM的装置连接率为99%,95 %,95%和84%。一旦连接,研究手臂之间的5个月的研究期间持续的设备使用。结论我们的试点研究表明,与仅提供远程支持的相比,在现场诊所访问中,在现场诊所访问中的中年和老年人之间的移动设备部署与更高的设备使用率相关。连接后,两个组中的设备使用相似。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号