The relation between average 1-year home blood pressure and the change in pro-BNP and left ventricle mass index.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to examine the association between average 1-year home blood pressure and the change in left ventricular mass index (LVMI) and pro-brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels. METHODS: This prospective study was a subgroup analysis of lifestyle intervention using mobile technology in patients with high cardiovascular risk: a pragmatic randomized clinical Trial (LIGHT). In total, 242 patients were stratified into tertiles according to their average 1-year home blood pressure. RESULTS: Patients grouped into the tertile 3 (T3) had a lower 1-year mean, SBP and DBP. The T3 group had a 2.1 times higher rate of decrease in pro-BNP and a 1.6 times higher rate of decrease in LVMI compared with T1, compared with the reference group. The area under curve (AUC) value of average 1-year home blood pressure was higher than that of mean SBP or DBP. (AUC, 0.75 vs. AUC, 0.70 vs. AUC, 0.69, respectively). Spearman rank correlation demonstrated that average 1-year home blood pressure had a correlation with Δpro-BNP and ΔLVMI. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that average 1-year home blood pressure may have a significant association with a decrease in LVMI and pro-BNP. Our study appears to be the first to evaluate the association between average 1-year home blood pressure and the change in LVMI and pro-BNP.

Effect of a mobile application and smart devices on heart rate variability in diabetic patients with high cardiovascular risk: A sub-study of the LIGHT randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: This investigation aims to evaluate the effect of a mobile application and smart devices on frequency and time domains of heart rate variability (HRV) in diabetic patients in 1-year follow-up. METHODS: This is post-hoc analysis of a diabetic subgroup of "Lifestyle Intervention usinG mobile technology in patients with high cardiovascular risk: a pragmatic randomized clinical Trial" (LIGHT). One hundred and nine and 118 patients were enrolled in two arms: the intervention plus usual care and the usual care arm. The study outcome was the 1-year HRV parameters adjusted to the baseline HRV parameters. HRV measures were recorded for every patient at the randomization and final visits with 24-hour Holter monitoring. RESULTS: There was an improvement in the standard deviation of normal to normal (SDNN) R-R intervals 24-hour by 4.8 (adjusted treatment effect 4.8, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-9.5; P = 0.044) in the intervention-plus-usual-care arm compared to usual care after a 1-year follow-up. The improvement was also experienced in other HRV time domains including standard deviation of the mean R-R intervals calculated over a 5-minute period, SDNN, square root of the mean squared difference of successive R-R intervals, and the percentage of the differences between adjacent normal R-R intervals exceeding 50 milliseconds. A significant enhancement was also detected in HRV frequency domains of total power low frequency and high frequency in the intervention plus usual care compared to usual care after a 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The mobile application and smart device technology compared to usual care alone improved HRV parameters in diabetic patients at 1-year follow-up.

Lifestyle intervention using mobile technology and smart devices in patients with high cardiovascular risk: A pragmatic randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Mobile technology-based solutions present promising effects against cardiovascular diseases. Long-term follow-up in mobile phone-based interventions has not yet been elucidated as a primary prevention technique for cardiovascular diseases. The objective of the present trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of lifestyle intervention on the change in the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk score in a 1-year follow-up using smart phone technology in patients with high cardiovascular risk. METHODS: This prospective, randomised, single-centre clinical investigation enrolled 242 and 241 patients to the intervention plus usual care and usual care arms, respectively. The primary outcome of this study was the 1-year ASCVD risk score adjusted to baseline ASCVD risk score. ASCVD risk scores were calculated for every study participant at the randomisation and final stages. RESULTS: After a 1-year follow-up, the intervention plus usual care reduced the ASCVD score by 2.7% (adjusted treatment effect -2.7, 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.2,-3.3, p<0.0001). An improvement was observed in favour of the intervention plus usual care arm in the majority of the pre-specified secondary endpoints. The high sensitive troponin and high sensitive C-reactive protein levels at 1 year were similar between the two arms. The treatment effect was homogenous for diabetes mellitus, gender, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides and body mass index; however, heterogeneity in the treatment effect was observed for age. CONCLUSIONS: The lifestyle intervention using smart phone technology compared to usual care alone in patients with high cardiovascular risk reduced the ASCVD score at 1-year follow-up.

Rationale and design of lifestyle intervention using mobile technology in patients with high cardiovascular risk: A pragmatic randomized clinical trial.

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world and contributes a considerable burden to healthcare costs. Primary prevention strategies, particularly adopting healthy lifestyle habits, have great potential to reduce the risk of CVD. Patient compliance remains the major cause of the failure of primary prevention strategies. Telehealth interventions and gamification through mobile applications can increase adherence and reduce healthcare costs. The primary objective of this study is to compare the effect of lifestyle intervention using mobile technology plus usual care with usual care alone in patients with a high CVD risk.