Development and testing of an iPad application for teaching self-management to heart failure patients. (Nursing/Allied Health Professional Investigator Award)- Abstract

Purpose: Heart failure (HF) is the leading cause of hospitalization and significant burden to the health care system in Australia. To reduce hospitalizations, multidisciplinary approaches and enhance self-management programs have been strongly advocated for HF patients globally. HF patients who can effectively manage their symptoms and adhere to complex medicine regimes will experience fewer hospitalizations. Research indicates that information technologies (IT) have a significant role in providing support to promote patients' self-management skills. The iPad utilizes user-friendly interfaces and to date an application for HF patient education has not been developed. This project aimed to develop the HF iPad teaching application in the way that would be engaging, interactive and simple to follow and usable for patients' carers and health care workers within both the hospital and community setting. Methods: The design for the development and evaluation of the application consisted of two action research cycles. Each cycle included 3 phases of testing and feedback from three groups comprising IT team, HF experts and patients. All patient education materials of the application were derived from national and international evidence based practice guidelines and patient self-care recommendations. Results: The iPad application has animated anatomy and physiology that simply and clearly teaches the concepts of the normal heart and the heart in failure. Patient Avatars throughout the application can be changed to reflect the sex and culture of the patient. There is voice-over presenting a script developed by the heart failure expert panel. Additional engagement processes included points of interaction throughout the application with touch screen responses and the ability of the patient to enter their weight and this data is secured and transferred to the clinic nurse and/or research data set. The application has been used independently, for instance, at home or using headphones in a clinic waiting room or most commonly to aid a nurse-led HF consultation. Conclusion: This project utilized iPad as an educational tool to standardize HF education from nurses who are not always heart failure specialists. Furthermore, study is currently ongoing to evaluate of the effectiveness of this tool on patient outcomes and to develop several specifically designed cultural adaptations [Hispanic (USA), Aboriginal (Australia), and Maori (New Zealand)].

Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis : the patient's perspective

OBJECTIVE: To determine the point at which differences in clinical assessment scores on physical ability, pain and overall condition are sufficiently large to correspond to a subjective perception of a meaningful difference from the perspective of the patient. METHODS: Forty patients with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis participated in an evening of clinical assessment and one-on-one conversations with each other regarding their arthritic condition. The assessments included tender and swollen joint counts, clinician and patient global assessments, participant assessment of pain and the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) on physical ability. After each conversation, participants rated themselves relative to their conversational partner on physical ability, pain and overall condition. These subjective comparative ratings were compared to the differences of the individual clinical assessments. RESULTS: In total there were 120 conversations. Generally participants judged themselves as less disabled than others. They rated themselves as "somewhat better" than their conversation partner when they had a (mean) 7% better score on the HAQ, 6% less pain, and 9% better global assessment. In contrast, they rated themselves as "somewhat worse" when they had a (mean) 16% worse score on the HAQ, 16% more pain, and 29% worse global assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients view clinically important differences in an asymmetric manner. These results can provide guidance in interpreting results and planning clinical trials.