Rehabilitation at Home Using Mobile Health for Older Adults Hospitalized for Ischemic Heart Disease: The RESILIENT Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE

Among older adults with ischemic heart disease, participation in traditional ambulatory cardiac rehabilitation (CR) remains low. While mobile health CR (mHealth-CR) provides a novel opportunity to deliver care, age-specific impairments to technology use may limit uptake, and efficacy data are currently lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether mHealth-CR improves functional capacity in older adults.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The RESILIENT phase 2, multicenter, randomized clinical trial recruited patients aged 65 years or older with ischemic heart disease (defined as a hospital visit for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization) from 5 academic hospitals in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts between January 9, 2020, and April 22, 2024.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomized 3:1 to mHealth-CR or usual care. mHealth-CR consisted of commercially available software delivered on a tablet computer, coupled with remote monitoring and weekly exercise therapist telephone calls, delivered over a 3-month duration. As RESILIENT was a trial conducted in a routine care setting to inform decision-making, participants in both arms were also allowed to receive traditional CR at their cardiologist's discretion.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was change from baseline to 3 months in functional capacity, measured by 6-minute walk distance (6MWD). Secondary outcomes were health status (12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12]), residual angina, and impairment in activities of daily living.

RESULTS

A total of 400 participants (median age, 71.0 years [range, 65.0-91.0 years]; 291 [72.8%] male) were randomized to mHealth-CR (n = 298) or usual care (n = 102) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Of those, 356 participants (89.0%) returned in person for 6MWD assessment at 3 months. For the primary outcome, there was no adjusted difference in 6MWD between participants receiving mHealth-CR vs usual care (15.6 m; 95% CI, -0.3 to 31.5 m; P = .06). Among subgroups, there was an improvement in 6MWD among women (36.6 m; 95% CI, 8.7-64.4 m). There were no differences in any secondary outcomes between groups (eg, adjusted difference in SF-12 physical component scores at 3 months: -1.9 points; 95% CI, -3.9 to 0.2 points). Based on inverse propensity score weighting, there was no effect of mHealth-CR on 6MWD among those who did not attend traditional CR (25.7 m; 95% CI, -8.7 to 60.2 m).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial of mHealth-CR vs usual care, mHealth-CR did not significantly increase 6MWD or result in improvements in secondary outcomes. The findings suggest the older adult population may require more age-tailored mHealth strategies to effectively improve outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03978130.