↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Adherence to self-care in patients with heart failure in the HeartCycle study

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
111 Mendeley
Title
Adherence to self-care in patients with heart failure in the HeartCycle study
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s88482
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wim Stut, Carolyn Deighan, John G Cleland, Tiny Jaarsma

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate a novel online education and coaching program to promote self-care among patients with heart failure. In this program, education and coaching content is automatically tailored to the knowledge and behavior of the patient. The evaluation of the program took place within the scope of the HeartCycle study. This multi-center, observational study examined the ability of a third generation telehealth system to enhance the management of patients recently (<60 days) admitted to the hospital for worsening heart failure or outpatients with persistent New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Classification III/IV symptoms. Self-reported self-care behavior was assessed at baseline and study-end by means of the 9-item European Heart Failure Self-care Behavior scale. Adherence to daily weighing, blood pressure monitoring, and reporting of symptoms was determined by analyzing the system's database. Of 123 patients enrolled, the mean age was 66±12 years, 66% were in NYHA III and 79% were men. Self-reported self-care behavior scores (n=101) improved during the study for daily weighing, low-salt diet, physical activity (P<0.001), and fluid restriction (P<0.05). Average adherence (n=120) to measuring weight was 90%±16%, to measuring blood pressure was 89%±17% and to symptom reporting was 66%±32%. Self-reported self-care behavior scores improved significantly during the period of observation, and the objective evidence of adherence to daily weight and blood pressure measurements was high and remained stable over time. However, adherence to daily reporting of symptoms was lower and declined in the long-term.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 107 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 9%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 27 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 20%
Psychology 8 7%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Computer Science 4 4%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 30 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2015.
All research outputs
#23,154,082
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,656
of 1,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,436
of 277,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#52
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.