Technology-Enabled Self-Monitoring of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease With or Without Asynchronous Remote Monitoring: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

Real-World Evaluation of an EHR-Enabled Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test

Purpose

The Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Assessment Test (CAT) measures COPD's impact on well-being and daily activities and is a recommended assessment by the Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). Our research objective was to describe a real-world CAT implementation, including the association of CAT scores with subsequent treatment and clinical outcomes.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective, observational, comparative cohort study was conducted among adults with COPD who received care from M Health Fairview, a US healthcare delivery system. Eligible patients had an initial electronic health record (EHR) enabled CAT administration (index) between 8/2017 and 12/2021. Patients were grouped by score (<10 [low impact]; 11-20 [moderate]; and 21-40 [high]). Demographics, comorbidities, provider specialty, and exacerbation history were derived from EHR data in the 12 months preceding index.

Results

Of 11,194 eligible individuals, 821 (7.3%) were administered CAT (cases). Compared to individuals with no documented CAT scores (comparators), cases were older (66.7 vs 63.9 years; p < 0.05) and had higher rates of comorbidities (93.9% vs 79.2%, p < 0.05) and exacerbations (0.31 vs 0.14 PPPY). A total of 61.5% of pulmonologists and 11.5% of primary care providers (PCPs) administered the CAT at least once. Repeated use was more common among pulmonologists (55.7%) than PCPs (7.0%). Medication intensification was most common (28.1%) among individuals with high CAT scores, followed by moderate (21.6%), and low (10.0%). Post-index exacerbations were experienced by 24.2%, 17.4%, and 7.7% of patients with high, moderate, and low CAT scores.

Conclusion

In a real-world practice setting, few patients with COPD received a CAT, although pulmonologists demonstrated repeated use. Higher CAT scores were associated with COPD medication regimen intensification and exacerbations. Further investigation on how to incorporate the CAT into routine care and optimize its impact on medical decision making and evaluation is warranted.

The Enterprise's Willingness to Use Remote Monitoring Technology Under the Background of Green Operation and Service-Oriented Manufacturing

The current development of remote monitoring technology (RMT) has become increasingly mature. The key to implementing this technology lies in the user's willingness to use it. In order to study the influencing factors of using RMT in green operation and service-oriented manufacturing enterprises, based on organizational behavior, this exploration discusses the reasons that affect the introduction of new technologies into enterprises from the perspectives of perceived risk, conformity and technology acceptance. Moreover, a series of data is obtained through the questionnaire and the results are obtained by analyzing the data. Suggestions to improve the use of RMT in enterprises are put forward. The results show that technology itself, external environment and organizational characteristics can all affect the decision-making of enterprises on new technology.

Self-management interventions for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Self-management interventions help people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to acquire and practise the skills they need to carry out disease-specific medical regimens, guide changes in health behaviour and provide emotional support to enable them to control their disease. Since the 2014 update of this review, several studies have been published.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of COPD self-management interventions compared to usual care in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and respiratory-related hospital admissions. To evaluate the safety of COPD self-management interventions compared to usual care in terms of respiratory-related mortality and all-cause mortality. Secondary objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of COPD self-management interventions compared to usual care in terms of other health outcomes and healthcare utilisation. To evaluate effective characteristics of COPD self-management interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, trials registries and the reference lists of included studies up until January 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomised trials (CRTs) published since 1995. To be eligible for inclusion, self-management interventions had to include at least two intervention components and include an iterative process between participant and healthcare provider(s) in which goals were formulated and feedback was given on self-management actions by the participant.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by reaching consensus or by involving a third review author. We contacted study authors to obtain additional information and missing outcome data where possible. Primary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), number of respiratory-related hospital admissions, respiratory-related mortality, and all-cause mortality. When appropriate, we pooled study results using random-effects modelling meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 studies involving 6008 participants with COPD. The follow-up time ranged from two-and-a-half to 24 months and the content of the interventions was diverse. Participants' mean age ranged from 57 to 74 years, and the proportion of male participants ranged from 33% to 98%. The post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) to forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio of participants ranged from 33.6% to 57.0%. The FEV1/FVC ratio is a measure used to diagnose COPD and to determine the severity of the disease. Studies were conducted on four different continents (Europe (n = 15), North America (n = 8), Asia (n = 1), and Oceania (n = 4); with one study conducted in both Europe and Oceania). Self-management interventions likely improve HRQoL, as measured by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (lower score represents better HRQoL) with a mean difference (MD) from usual care of -2.86 points (95% confidence interval (CI) -4.87 to -0.85; 14 studies, 2778 participants; low-quality evidence). The pooled MD of -2.86 did not reach the SGRQ minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of four points. Self-management intervention participants were also at a slightly lower risk for at least one respiratory-related hospital admission (odds ratio (OR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.98; 15 studies, 3263 participants; very low-quality evidence). The number needed to treat to prevent one respiratory-related hospital admission over a mean of 9.75 months' follow-up was 15 (95% CI 8 to 399) for participants with high baseline risk and 26 (95% CI 15 to 677) for participants with low baseline risk. No differences were observed in respiratory-related mortality (risk difference (RD) 0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.04; 8 studies, 1572 participants ; low-quality evidence) and all-cause mortality (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; 24 studies, 5719 participants; low-quality evidence). We graded the evidence to be of 'moderate' to 'very low' quality according to GRADE. All studies had a substantial risk of bias, because of lack of blinding of participants and personnel to the interventions, which is inherently impossible in a self-management intervention. In addition, risk of bias was noticeably increased because of insufficient information regarding a) non-protocol interventions, and b) analyses to estimate the effect of adhering to interventions. Consequently, the highest GRADE evidence score that could be obtained by studies was 'moderate'.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-management interventions for people with COPD are associated with improvements in HRQoL, as measured with the SGRQ, and a lower probability of respiratory-related hospital admissions. No excess respiratory-related and all-cause mortality risks were observed, which strengthens the view that COPD self-management interventions are unlikely to cause harm. By using stricter inclusion criteria, we decreased heterogeneity in studies, but also reduced the number of included studies and therefore our capacity to conduct subgroup analyses. Data were therefore still insufficient to reach clear conclusions about effective (intervention) characteristics of COPD self-management interventions. As tailoring of COPD self-management interventions to individuals is desirable, heterogeneity is and will likely remain present in self-management interventions. For future studies, we would urge using only COPD self-management interventions that include iterative interactions between participants and healthcare professionals who are competent using behavioural change techniques (BCTs) to elicit participants' motivation, confidence and competence to positively adapt their health behaviour(s) and develop skills to better manage their disease. In addition, to inform further subgroup and meta-regression analyses and to provide stronger conclusions regarding effective COPD self-management interventions, there is a need for more homogeneity in outcome measures. More attention should be paid to behavioural outcome measures and to providing more detailed, uniform and transparently reported data on self-management intervention components and BCTs. Assessment of outcomes over the long term is also recommended to capture changes in people's behaviour. Finally, information regarding non-protocol interventions as well as analyses to estimate the effect of adhering to interventions should be included to increase the quality of evidence.

Development of a smartphone application for Korean patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Self-monitoring based action plans

AIM

The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate a smartphone application (app) of a COPD action plan (AP) based on symptom self-monitoring (SM) [AP-SM Sapp] to support the early detection of, and response to, symptoms.

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the most prevalent respiratory diseases worldwide. Disease control is important to prevent progression of COPD caused by exacerbations; action plans are a successful strategy to prevent and manage COPD exacerbations. However, the digital literacy that COPD patients need to support technology-based COPD action plans is poorly understood.

METHODS

A systematic literature review identified components for the app's development. Content validity testing with 12 clinical experts identified 35 critical components for inclusion in the app's development. The app was then submitted to user experience evaluation by thirteen technology experts and nine COPD patients.

RESULTS

In user evaluation of the app, experts evaluated the AP-SM Sapp as a good quality app (57.37 ± 9.13) and COPD patients as an average quality app (44.44 ± 3.94) (range 0-69; higher scores indicating greater endorsement of app quality). Revisions based on these critiques produced a final version.

CONCLUSION

The app was developed to support COPD patients in the early detection of symptoms so that exacerbations could be prevented or managed appropriately. Although the app used simple messages and pictographs to enhance digital literacy (thus narrowing the digital literacy gap), efficient onboarding will be important if barriers to app use are to be further reduced.

Telehealth interventions: remote monitoring and consultations for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD, including bronchitis and emphysema) is a chronic condition causing shortness of breath, cough, and exacerbations leading to poor health outcomes. Face-to-face visits with health professionals can be hindered by severity of COPD or frailty, and by people living at a distance from their healthcare provider and having limited access to services. Telehealth technologies aimed at providing health care remotely through monitoring and consultations could help to improve health outcomes of people with COPD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of telehealth interventions that allow remote monitoring and consultation and multi-component interventions for reducing exacerbations and improving quality of life, while reducing dyspnoea symptoms, hospital service utilisation, and death among people with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register. Additional sources searched included the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the IEEEX Xplore Digital Library. The latest search was conducted in April 2020. We used the GRADE approach to judge the certainty of evidence for outcomes.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) included adults with diagnosed COPD. Asthma, cystic fibrosis, bronchiectasis, and other respiratory conditions were excluded. Interventions included remote monitoring or consultation plus usual care, remote monitoring or consultation alone, and mult-component interventions from all care settings. Quality of life scales included St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). The dyspnoea symptom scale used was the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire Self-Administered Standardized Scale (CRQ-SAS).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We assessed confidence in the evidence for each primary outcome using the GRADE method. Primary outcomes were exacerbations, quality of life, dyspnoea symptoms, hospital service utilisation, and mortality; a secondary outcome consisted of adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 studies in the review (5654 participants; male proportion 36% to 96%; female proportion 4% to 61%). Most remote monitoring interventions required participants to transfer measurements using a remote device and later health professional review (asynchronous). Only five interventions transferred data and allowed review by health professionals in real time (synchronous). Studies were at high risk of bias due to lack of blinding, and certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low. We found no evidence on comparison of remote consultations with or without usual care. Remote monitoring plus usual care (8 studies, 1033 participants) Very uncertain evidence suggests that remote monitoring plus usual care may have little to no effect on the number of people experiencing exacerbations at 26 weeks or 52 weeks. There may be little to no difference in effect on quality of life (SGRQ) at 26 weeks (very low to low certainty) or on hospitalisation (all-cause or COPD-related; very low certainty). COPD-related hospital re-admissions are probably reduced at 26 weeks (hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.93; 106 participants; moderate certainty). There may be little to no difference in deaths between intervention and usual care (very low certainty). We found no evidence for dyspnoea symptoms or adverse events. Remote monitoring alone (10 studies, 2456 participants) Very uncertain evidence suggests that remote monitoring may result in little to no effect on the number of people experiencing exacerbations at 41 weeks (odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.55). There may be little to no effect on quality of life (SGRQ total at 17 weeks, or CAT at 38 and 52 weeks; very low certainty). There may be little to no effect on dyspnoea symptoms on the CRQ-SAS at 26 weeks (low certainty). There may be no difference in effects on the number of people admitted to hospital (very low certainty) or on deaths (very low certainty). We found no evidence for adverse events. Multi-component interventions with remote monitoring or consultation component (11 studies, 2165 participants) Very uncertain evidence suggests that multi-component interventions may have little to no effect on the number of people experiencing exacerbations at 52 weeks. Quality of life at 13 weeks may improve as seen in SGRQ total score (mean difference -9.70, 95% CI -18.32 to -1.08; 38 participants; low certainty) but not at 26 or 52 weeks (very low certainty). COPD assessment test (CAT) scores may improve at a mean of 38 weeks, but evidence is very uncertain and interventions are varied. There may be little to no effect on the number of people admitted to hospital at 33 weeks (low certainty). Multi-component interventions are likely to result in fewer people re-admitted to hospital at a mean of 39 weeks (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.81; 344 participants, 3 studies; moderate certainty). There may be little to no difference in death at a mean of 40 weeks (very low certainty). There may be little to no effect on people experiencing adverse events (very low certainty). We found no evidence for dyspnoea symptoms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Remote monitoring plus usual care provided asynchronously may not be beneficial overall compared to usual care alone. Some benefit is seen in reduction of COPD-related hospital re-admissions, but moderate-certainty evidence is based on one study. We have not found any evidence for dyspnoea symptoms nor harms, and there is no difference in fatalities when remote monitoring is provided in addition to usual care. Remote monitoring interventions alone are no better than usual care overall for health outcomes. Multi-component interventions with asynchronous remote monitoring are no better than usual care but may provide short-term benefit for quality of life and may result in fewer re-admissions to hospital for any cause. We are uncertain whether remote monitoring is responsible for the positive impact on re-admissions, and we are unable to discern the long-term benefits of receiving remote monitoring as part of patient care. Owing to paucity of evidence, it is unclear which COPD severity subgroups would benefit from telehealth interventions. Given there is no evidence of harm, telehealth interventions may be beneficial as an additional health resource depending on individual needs based on professional assessment. Larger studies can determine long-term effects of these interventions.

Digital interventions for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with dyspnoea, cough or sputum production (or both) and affects quality of life and functional status. More efficient approaches to alternative management that may include patients themselves managing their condition need further exploration in order to reduce the impact on both patients and healthcare services. Digital interventions may potentially impact on health behaviours and encourage patient engagement.

OBJECTIVES

To assess benefits and harms of digital interventions for managing COPD and apply Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) taxonomy to describe and explore intervention content.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register (date of last search 28 April 2020). We found other trials at web-based clinical trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing digital technology interventions with or without routine supported self-management to usual care, or control treatment for self-management. Multi-component interventions (of which one component was digital self-management) compared with usual care, standard care or control treatment were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Discrepancies were resolved with a third review author. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Primary outcomes were impact on health behaviours, self-efficacy, exacerbations and quality of life, including the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). The minimally important difference (MID) for the SGRQ is 4 points. Two review authors independently applied BCT taxonomy to identify mechanisms in the digital interventions that influence behaviours.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included in the meta-analyses (1518 participants) ranging from 13 to 52 weeks duration. Participants had mild to very severe COPD. Risk of bias was high due to lack of blinding. GRADE ratings were low to very low certainty due to lack of blinding and imprecision. Common BCT clusters identified as behaviour change mechanisms in interventions were goals and planning, feedback and monitoring, social support, shaping knowledge and antecedents. Digital technology intervention with or without routine supported self-management Interventions included mobile phone (three studies), smartphone applications (one study), and web or Internet-based (five studies). Evidence is very uncertain about effects on impact on health behaviours as measured by six-minute walk distance (6MWD) at 13 weeks (mean difference (MD) 26.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) -21.70 to 74.10; participants = 122; studies = 2) or 23 to 26 weeks (MD 14.31, 95% CI -19.41 to 48.03; participants = 164; studies = 3). There may be improvement in 6MWD at 52 weeks (MD 54.33 95% CI -35.47 to 144.12; participants = 204; studies = 2) but studies were varied (very low certainty). There may be no difference in self-efficacy on managing Chronic Disease Scale (SEMCD) or pulmonary rehabilitation adapted index of self-efficacy tool (PRAISE). Evidence is very uncertain. Quality of life may be slightly improved on the chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (CRQ) at 13 weeks (MD 0.45, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.90; participants = 123; studies = 2; low certainty), but is not clinically important (MID 0.5). There may be little or no difference at 23 or 52 weeks (low to very low certainty). There may be a clinical improvement on SGRQ total at 52 weeks (MD -26.57, 95% CI -34.09 to -19.05; participants = 120; studies = 1; low certainty). Evidence for COPD assessment test (CAT) and Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) is very uncertain. There may be little or no difference in dyspnoea symptoms (CRQ dyspnoea) at 13, 23 weeks or 52 weeks (low to very low certainty evidence) or mean number of exacerbations at 26 weeks (low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence for the number of people experiencing adverse events. Multi-component interventions Digital components included mobile phone (one study), and web or internet-based (four studies). Evidence is very uncertain about effects on impact on health behaviour (6MWD) at 13 weeks (MD 99.60, 95% CI -15.23 to 214.43; participants = 20; studies = 1). No evidence was found for self-efficacy. Four studies reported effects on quality of life (SGRQ and CCQ scales). The evidence is very uncertain. There may be no difference in the number of people experiencing exacerbations or mean days to first exacerbation at 52 weeks with a multi-component intervention compared to standard care. Evidence is very uncertain about effects on the number of people experiencing adverse events at 52 weeks.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate a clear benefit or harm of digital technology interventions with or without supported self-management, or multi-component interventions compared to usual care in improving the 6MWD or self-efficacy. We found there may be some short-term improvement in quality of life with digital interventions, but there is no evidence about whether the effect is sustained long term. Dyspnoea symptoms may improve over a longer duration of digital intervention use. The evidence for multi-component interventions is very uncertain and as there is little or no evidence for adverse events, we cannot determine the benefit or harm of these interventions. The evidence base is predominantly of very low certainty with concerns around high risk of bias due to lack of blinding. Given that variation of interventions and blinding is likely to be a concern, future, larger studies are needed taking these limitations in consideration. Future studies are needed to determine whether the small improvements observed in this review can be applied to the general COPD population. A clear understanding of behaviour change through the BCT classification is important to gauge uptake of digital interventions and health outcomes in people with varying severity of COPD. Currently there is no guidance for interpreting BCT components of a digital intervention for changes to health outcomes. We could not interpret the BCT findings to the health outcomes we were investigating due to limited evidence that was of very low certainty. In future research, standardised approaches need to be considered when designing protocols to investigate effectiveness of digital interventions by including a standardised approach to BCT classification in addition to validated behavioural outcome measures that may reflect changes in behaviour.

Outpatient Interventions for Managing Acute Complications of Chronic Diseases: A Scoping Review and Implications for Patients With CKD

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have high rates of emergency department (ED) use and hospitalization. Outpatient care may provide an alternative to ED and inpatient care in this population. We aimed to explore the scope of outpatient interventions used to manage acute complications of chronic diseases and highlight opportunities to adapt and test interventions in the CKD population.

STUDY DESIGN

Scoping review of quantitative and qualitative studies.

SETTING & POPULATION

Outpatient interventions for adults experiencing acute complications related to 1 of 5 eligible chronic diseases (ie, CKD, chronic respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes).

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, grey literature, and conference abstracts were searched to December 2019.

DATA EXTRACTION

Intervention and study characteristics were extracted using standardized tools.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Quantitative data were summarized descriptively; qualitative data were summarized thematically. Our approach observed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews.

RESULTS

77 studies (25 randomized controlled trials, 29 observational, 12 uncontrolled before-after, 5 quasi-experimental, 4 qualitative, and 2 mixed method) describing 57 unique interventions were included. Of identified intervention types (hospital at home [n = 16], observation unit [n = 9], ED-based specialist service [n = 4], ambulatory program [n = 18], and telemonitoring [n = 10]), most were studied in chronic respiratory and cardiovascular disease populations. None targeted the CKD population. Interventions were delivered in the home, ED, hospital, and ambulatory setting by a variety of health care providers. Cost savings were demonstrated for most interventions, although improvements in other outcome domains were not consistently observed.

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity of included studies; lack of data for outpatient interventions for acute complications related to CKD.

CONCLUSIONS

Several interventions for outpatient management of acute complications of chronic disease were identified. Although none was specific to the CKD population, features could be adapted and tested to address the complex acute-care needs of patients with CKD.

Technology-Enabled Self-Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease With or Without Asynchronous Remote Monitoring: Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of mortality and leads to frequent hospital admissions and emergency department (ED) visits. COPD exacerbations are an important patient outcome, and reducing their frequency would result in significant cost savings. Remote monitoring and self-monitoring could both help patients manage their symptoms and reduce the frequency of exacerbations, but they have different resource implications and have not been directly compared.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare the effectiveness of implementing a technology-enabled self-monitoring program versus a technology-enabled remote monitoring program in patients with COPD compared with a standard care group.

METHODS

We conducted a 3-arm randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a remote monitoring and a self-monitoring program relative to standard care. Patients with COPD were recruited from outpatient clinics and a pulmonary rehabilitation program. Patients in both interventions used a Bluetooth-enabled device kit to monitor oxygen saturation, blood pressure, temperature, weight, and symptoms, but only patients in the remote monitoring group were monitored by a respiratory therapist. All patients were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 6 months after program initiation. Outcomes included self-management skills, as measured by the Partners in Health (PIH) Scale; patient symptoms measured with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ); and the Bristol COPD Knowledge Questionnaire (BCKQ). Patients were also asked to self-report on health system use, and data on health use were collected from the hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients participated in the study: 40 in the standard care, 41 in the self-monitoring, and 41 in the remote monitoring groups. Although all 3 groups improved in PIH scores, BCKQ scores, and SGRQ impact scores, there were no significant differences among any of the groups. No effects were observed on the SGRQ activity or symptom scores or on hospitalizations, ED visits, or clinic visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite regular use of the technology, patients with COPD assigned to remote monitoring or self-monitoring did not have any improvement in patient outcomes such as self-management skills, knowledge, or symptoms, or in health care use compared with each other or with a standard care group. This may be owing to low health care use at baseline, the lack of structured educational components in the intervention groups, and the lack of integration of the action plan with the technology.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03741855; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/ NCT03741855.