Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 1;9(3):e38469.
doi: 10.2196/38469.

Remotely Conducted App-Based Intervention for Cardiovascular Disease and Diabetes Risk Awareness and Prevention: Single-Group Feasibility Trial

Vera Helen Buss  1   2 , Marlien Varnfield  1 , Mark Harris  2 , Margo Barr  2
Affiliations

Remotely Conducted App-Based Intervention for Cardiovascular Disease and Diabetes Risk Awareness and Prevention: Single-Group Feasibility Trial

Vera Helen Buss et al. JMIR Hum Factors. .

Abstract

Background: Cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus are two of the most prevalent chronic conditions worldwide. An unhealthy lifestyle greatly contributes to someone's risk of developing these conditions. Mobile health is an emerging technology that can help deliver health promotion interventions to the population, for example, in the form of health apps.

Objective: The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of an app-based intervention for cardiovascular and diabetes risk awareness and prevention by measuring nonusage, dropout, adherence to app use, and usability of the app over 3 months.

Methods: Participants were eligible if they were aged 45 years or older, resided in Australia, were free of cardiovascular disease and diabetes, were fluent in English, and owned a smartphone. In the beginning, participants received an email with instructions on how to install the app and a user guide. After 3 months, they received an email with an invitation to an end-of-study survey. The survey included questions about general smartphone use and the user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale. We analyzed app-generated and survey data by using descriptive and inferential statistics as well as thematic analysis for open-text comments.

Results: Recruitment took place between September and October 2021. Of the 46 participants who consented to the study, 20 (44%) never used the app and 15 (33%) dropped out. The median age of the app users at baseline was 62 (IQR 56-67) years. Adherence to app use, that is, using the app at least once a week over 3 months, was 17% (8/46) of the total sample and 31% (8/26) of all app users. The mean app quality rating on the user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale was 3.5 (SD 0.6) of 5 points. The app scored the highest for the information section and the lowest for the engagement section of the scale.

Conclusions: Nonusage and dropouts were too high, and the adherence was too low to consider the intervention in its current form feasible. Potential barriers that we identified include the research team not actively engaging with participants early in the study to verify that all participants could install the app, the intervention did not involve direct contact with health care professionals, and the app did not have enough interactive features.

Keywords: app-based intervention; cardiology; cardiovascular disease; diabetes; diabetes mellitus, type 2; feasibility studies; heart disease; mHealth; mobile health; participate engagement; primary prevention; smartphone.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram for this study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Results of the app quality rating on the Likert scale in the user version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (n=22).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Results of the perceived impact rating on the Likert scale.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. GBD 2019 Risk Factors Collaborators Global burden of 87 risk factors in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1223–1249. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30752-2. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140-6736(20)30752-2 S0140-6736(20)30752-2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. GBD 2017 Risk Factor Collaborators Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018 Nov 10;392(10159):1923–1994. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32225-6. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0140-6736(18)32225-6 S0140-6736(18)32225-6 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Atun R, Jaffar S, Nishtar S, Knaul FM, Barreto ML, Nyirenda M, Banatvala N, Piot P. Improving responsiveness of health systems to non-communicable diseases. Lancet. 2013 Feb 23;381(9867):690–7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60063-X.S0140-6736(13)60063-X - DOI - PubMed
    1. Digital health trends 2021. The IQVIA Institute - Reports. 2021. Jul 22, [2022-06-06]. https://www.iqvia.com/insights/the-iqvia-insti tute/reports/digital-heal... .
    1. Safavi K, Mathews SC, Bates DW, Dorsey ER, Cohen AB. Top-Funded Digital Health Companies And Their Impact On High-Burden, High-Cost Conditions. Health Aff (Millwood) 2019 Jan;38(1):115–123. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05081. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources