Effectiveness of eHealth Self-management Interventions in Patients With Heart Failure: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

• Published in: Journal of medical Internet research Vol. 24; no. 9; p. e38697
• Main Authors: Liu, Siru, Li, Jili, Wan, Ding-Yuan, Li, Runyi, Qu, Zhan, Hu, Yundi, Liu, Jialin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Canada Journal of Medical Internet Research 26.09.2022; Gunther Eysenbach MD MPH, Associate Professor; JMIR Publications
• Subjects: Adult; Bias; Cardiac patients; Care and treatment; Chronic illnesses; Clinical outcomes; Clinical trials; Comparative analysis; Drugs; Global health; Heart failure; Heart Failure - therapy; High risk; Humans; Intervention; Medication Adherence; Meta-analysis; Morbidity; Mortality; Patients; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Readmission; Review; Risk assessment; Self care; Self-Management; Selfmanagement; Systematic review; Telemedicine; United States > US; heart failure; cardiovascular; morbidity; systematic review; self-management; cardiology; eHealth
• ISSN: 1438-8871; 1439-4456; 1438-8871
• DOI: 10.2196/38697

Heart failure (HF) is a common clinical syndrome associated with substantial morbidity, a heavy economic burden, and high risk of readmission. eHealth self-management interventions may be an effective way to improve HF clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of eHealth self-management in patients with HF. This study included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of eHealth interventions with usual care in adult patients with HF using searches of the EMBASE, PubMed, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL databases from January 1, 2011, to July 12, 2022. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2) was used to assess the risk of bias for each study. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria were used to rate the certainty of the evidence for each outcome of interest. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager (RevMan v.5.4) and R (v.4.1.0 x64) software. In total, 24 RCTs with 9634 participants met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the usual-care group, eHealth self-management interventions could significantly reduce all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.98, P=.03; GRADE: low quality) and cardiovascular mortality (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59-0.92, P=.008; GRADE: moderate quality), as well as all-cause readmissions (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73-0.93, P=.002; GRADE: low quality) and HF-related readmissions (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.66-0.90, P<.001; GRADE: moderate quality). The meta-analyses also showed that eHealth interventions could increase patients' knowledge of HF and improve their quality of life, but there were no statistically significant effects. However, eHealth interventions could significantly increase medication adherence (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.42-2.34, P<.001; GRADE: low quality) and improve self-care behaviors (standardized mean difference -1.34, 95% CI -2.46 to -0.22, P=.02; GRADE: very low quality). A subgroup analysis of primary outcomes regarding the enrolled population setting found that eHealth interventions were more effective in patients with HF after discharge compared with those in the ambulatory clinic setting. eHealth self-management interventions could benefit the health of patients with HF in various ways. However, the clinical effects of eHealth interventions in patients with HF are affected by multiple aspects, and more high-quality studies are needed to demonstrate effectiveness.