Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37279054›Full record

ArticleJMIR nursing2023

Smartphone-Based Remote Monitoring for Chronic Heart Failure: Mixed Methods Analysis of User Experience From Patient and Nurse Perspectives.

Alice Auton, Sameer Zaman, Yorissa Padayachee, Jack W Samways, Nicholas M Quaife, Mark Sweeney, Indira Tenorio, Nick W F Linton, Graham D Cole, Nicholas S Peters and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Smartphone application-based interventions for cardiometabolic risk factor management: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Smartphone application-based intervention to lower blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Alice Auton *Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4086-1898
Sameer Zaman *Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1467-8176
Yorissa PadayacheeImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6576-4541
Jack W SamwaysImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9090-9610
Nicholas M QuaifeImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2755-2086
Mark SweeneyImperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5098-0076
Indira TenorioImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7266-527X
Nick W F LintonImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5712-849X
Graham D ColeImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3157-0335
Nicholas S PetersImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3581-8078
Jamil MayetImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4665-6422
Carys BartonImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5652-3538
Carla PlymenImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8237-9581

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/CRA/22/23036
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommunity-based management by heart failure specialist nurses (HFSNs) is key to improving self-care in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Remote monitoring (RM) can aid nurse-led management, but in the literature, user feedback evaluation is skewed in favor of the patient rather than nursing user experience. Furthermore, the ways in which different groups use the same RM platform at the same time are rarely directly compared in the literature. We present a balanced semantic analysis of user feedback from patient and nurse perspectives of Luscii, a smartphone-based RM strategy combining self-measurement of vital signs, instant messaging, and e-learning.

objectiveThis study aims to (1) evaluate how patients and nurses use this type of RM (usage type), (2) evaluate patients' and nurses' user feedback on this type of RM (user experience), and (3) directly compare the usage type and user experience of patients and nurses using the same type of RM platform at the same time.

methodsWe performed a retrospective usage type and user experience evaluation of the RM platform from the perspective of both patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and the HFSNs using the platform to manage them. We conducted semantic analysis of written patient feedback provided via the platform and a focus group of 6 HFSNs. Additionally, as an indirect measure of tablet adherence, self-measured vital signs (blood pressure, heart rate, and body mass) were extracted from the RM platform at onboarding and 3 months later. Paired 2-tailed t tests were used to evaluate differences between mean scores across the 2 timepoints.

resultsA total of 79 patients (mean age 62 years; 35%, 28/79 female) were included. Semantic analysis of usage type revealed extensive, bidirectional information exchange between patients and HFSNs using the platform. Semantic analysis of user experience demonstrates a range of positive and negative perspectives. Positive impacts included increased patient engagement, convenience for both user groups, and continuity of care. Negative impacts included information overload for patients and increased workload for nurses. After the patients used the platform for 3 months, they showed significant reductions in heart rate (P=.004) and blood pressure (P=.008) but not body mass (P=.97) compared with onboarding.

conclusionsSmartphone-based RM with messaging and e-learning facilitates bilateral information sharing between patients and nurses on a range of topics. Patient and nurse user experience is largely positive and symmetrical, but there are possible negative impacts on patient attention and nurse workload. We recommend RM providers involve patient and nurse users in platform development, including recognition of RM usage in nursing job plans.

Indexed as

health-related quality of lifeheart failuremHealthnurse specialistpatient engagementself-careself-management

Identifiers

PMID37279054
PMCPMC10282903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.