Validity, Accuracy, and Safety Assessment of an Aerobic Interval Training Using an App-Based Prehabilitation Program (PROTEGO MAXIMA Trial) Before Major Surgery: Prospective, Interventional Pilot Study.

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JMIR mHealth and uHealth Pub Date : 2025-02-10 DOI:10.2196/55298
Sara Fatima Faqar Uz Zaman, Svenja Sliwinski, Lisa Mohr-Wetzel, Julia Dreilich, Natalie Filmann, Charlotte Detemble, Dora Zmuc, Felix Chun, Wojciech Derwich, Waldemar Schreiner, Wolf Bechstein, Johannes Fleckenstein, Andreas A Schnitzbauer
{"title":"Validity, Accuracy, and Safety Assessment of an Aerobic Interval Training Using an App-Based Prehabilitation Program (PROTEGO MAXIMA Trial) Before Major Surgery: Prospective, Interventional Pilot Study.","authors":"Sara Fatima Faqar Uz Zaman, Svenja Sliwinski, Lisa Mohr-Wetzel, Julia Dreilich, Natalie Filmann, Charlotte Detemble, Dora Zmuc, Felix Chun, Wojciech Derwich, Waldemar Schreiner, Wolf Bechstein, Johannes Fleckenstein, Andreas A Schnitzbauer","doi":"10.2196/55298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Major surgery is associated with significant morbidity and a reduced quality of life, particularly among older adults and individuals with frailty and impaired functional capacity. Multimodal prehabilitation can enhance functional recovery after surgery and reduce postoperative complications. Digital prehabilitation has the potential to be a resource-sparing and patient-empowering tool that improves patients' preoperative status; however, little remains known regarding their safety and accuracy as medical devices.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to test the accuracy and validity of a new software in comparison to the gold-standard electrocardiogram (ECG)-based heart rate measurement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PROTEGO MAXIMA trial was a prospective interventional pilot trial assessing the validity, accuracy, and safety of an app-based exercise program. The Prehab App calculates a personalized, risk-stratified aerobic interval training plan based on individual risk factors and utilizes wearables to monitor heart rate. Healthy students and patients undergoing major surgery were enrolled. A structured risk assessment was conducted, followed by a 6-minute walking test and a 37-minute supervised interval session. During the exercise, patients wore app-linked wearables for heart rate and distance measurements, which were compared with standard ECG and treadmill measurements. Safety, accuracy, and usability assessments included testing alarm signals, while the occurrence of adverse events served as the primary and secondary outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 75 participants were included. The mean heart rate differences between wearables and standard ECG were ≤5 bpm (beats per minute) with a mean absolute percentage error of ≤5%. Regression analysis revealed a significant impact of the BMI (odds ratio 0.90, 95% CI 0.82-0.98, P=.02) and Timed Up and Go Test score (odds ratio 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.55, P=.006) on the accuracy of heart rate measurement; 29 (39%) patients experienced adverse events: pain (5/12, 42%), ECG electrode-related skin irritations (2/42, 17%), dizziness (2/42, 17%), shortness of breath (2/42, 17%), and fatigue (1/42, 8%). No cardiovascular or serious adverse events were reported, and no serious device deficiency was detected. There were no indications of clinically meaningful overexertion based on laboratory values measured before and after the 6-minute walking test and exercise. The differences in means and ranges were as follows: lactate (mmol/l), mean 0.04 (range -3 to 6; P=.47); creatinine kinase (U/l), mean 12 (range -7 to 43; P<.001); and sodium (mmol/l), mean -2 (range -11 to 12; P<.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The interventional trial demonstrated the high safety of the exercise program and the accuracy of heart rate measurements using commercial wearables in patients before major surgery, paving the way for potential remote implementation in the future.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00026985; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00026985 and European Database on Medical Devices (EUDAMED) CIV-21-07-0307311.</p><p><strong>International registered report identifier (irrid): </strong>RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069394.</p>","PeriodicalId":14756,"journal":{"name":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","volume":"13 ","pages":"e55298"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11851035/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/55298","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Major surgery is associated with significant morbidity and a reduced quality of life, particularly among older adults and individuals with frailty and impaired functional capacity. Multimodal prehabilitation can enhance functional recovery after surgery and reduce postoperative complications. Digital prehabilitation has the potential to be a resource-sparing and patient-empowering tool that improves patients' preoperative status; however, little remains known regarding their safety and accuracy as medical devices.

Objective: This study aims to test the accuracy and validity of a new software in comparison to the gold-standard electrocardiogram (ECG)-based heart rate measurement.

Methods: The PROTEGO MAXIMA trial was a prospective interventional pilot trial assessing the validity, accuracy, and safety of an app-based exercise program. The Prehab App calculates a personalized, risk-stratified aerobic interval training plan based on individual risk factors and utilizes wearables to monitor heart rate. Healthy students and patients undergoing major surgery were enrolled. A structured risk assessment was conducted, followed by a 6-minute walking test and a 37-minute supervised interval session. During the exercise, patients wore app-linked wearables for heart rate and distance measurements, which were compared with standard ECG and treadmill measurements. Safety, accuracy, and usability assessments included testing alarm signals, while the occurrence of adverse events served as the primary and secondary outcome measures.

Results: A total of 75 participants were included. The mean heart rate differences between wearables and standard ECG were ≤5 bpm (beats per minute) with a mean absolute percentage error of ≤5%. Regression analysis revealed a significant impact of the BMI (odds ratio 0.90, 95% CI 0.82-0.98, P=.02) and Timed Up and Go Test score (odds ratio 0.12, 95% CI 0.03-0.55, P=.006) on the accuracy of heart rate measurement; 29 (39%) patients experienced adverse events: pain (5/12, 42%), ECG electrode-related skin irritations (2/42, 17%), dizziness (2/42, 17%), shortness of breath (2/42, 17%), and fatigue (1/42, 8%). No cardiovascular or serious adverse events were reported, and no serious device deficiency was detected. There were no indications of clinically meaningful overexertion based on laboratory values measured before and after the 6-minute walking test and exercise. The differences in means and ranges were as follows: lactate (mmol/l), mean 0.04 (range -3 to 6; P=.47); creatinine kinase (U/l), mean 12 (range -7 to 43; P<.001); and sodium (mmol/l), mean -2 (range -11 to 12; P<.001).

Conclusions: The interventional trial demonstrated the high safety of the exercise program and the accuracy of heart rate measurements using commercial wearables in patients before major surgery, paving the way for potential remote implementation in the future.

Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00026985; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00026985 and European Database on Medical Devices (EUDAMED) CIV-21-07-0307311.

International registered report identifier (irrid): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069394.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大手术前使用基于app的预康复程序(PROTEGO MAXIMA试验)进行有氧间歇训练的有效性、准确性和安全性评估:前瞻性、介入性先导研究
背景:大手术与显著的发病率和生活质量下降有关,特别是在老年人和身体虚弱和功能受损的个体中。多模式康复可促进术后功能恢复,减少术后并发症。数字康复有可能成为一种资源节约和患者赋权的工具,可以改善患者的术前状态;然而,人们对其作为医疗设备的安全性和准确性知之甚少。目的:本研究的目的是测试一个新的软件的准确性和有效性,以比较金标准的心电图(ECG)为基础的心率测量。方法:PROTEGO MAXIMA试验是一项前瞻性干预性试验,评估基于app的锻炼计划的有效性、准确性和安全性。Prehab应用程序根据个人风险因素计算出个性化的、风险分层的有氧间歇训练计划,并利用可穿戴设备监测心率。健康学生和接受大手术的患者被纳入研究。进行了结构化的风险评估,随后进行了6分钟的步行测试和37分钟的监督间歇训练。在锻炼过程中,患者佩戴与应用程序相连的可穿戴设备来测量心率和距离,并将其与标准心电图和跑步机测量结果进行比较。安全性、准确性和可用性评估包括检测报警信号,而不良事件的发生作为主要和次要的结局指标。结果:共纳入75名受试者。可穿戴设备与标准心电图的平均心率差异≤5 bpm(每分钟心跳数),平均绝对百分比误差≤5%。回归分析显示,BMI(优势比0.90,95% CI 0.82 ~ 0.98, P= 0.02)和Timed Up and Go Test评分(优势比0.12,95% CI 0.03 ~ 0.55, P= 0.006)对心率测量的准确性有显著影响;29例(39%)患者出现不良事件:疼痛(5/ 12,42 %)、ECG电极相关皮肤刺激(2/ 42,17 %)、头晕(2/ 42,17 %)、呼吸短促(2/ 42,17 %)和疲劳(1/ 42,8 %)。无心血管或严重不良事件报告,未发现严重的器械缺陷。根据6分钟步行测试和运动前后测量的实验室值,没有临床有意义的过度运动的迹象。平均值和范围的差异如下:乳酸(mmol/l),平均值0.04(范围-3 ~ 6;P =点);肌酐激酶(U/l),平均12(范围-7 ~ 43;结论:介入试验证明了运动计划的高安全性和在大手术前使用商用可穿戴设备测量心率的准确性,为未来可能的远程实施铺平了道路。试验注册:德国临床试验注册DRKS00026985;https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00026985和欧洲医疗器械数据库(EUDAMED) civi -21-07-0307311。国际注册报告标识符(irrid): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069394。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
JMIR mHealth and uHealth Medicine-Health Informatics
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
159
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: JMIR mHealth and uHealth (JMU, ISSN 2291-5222) is a spin-off journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JMIR mHealth and uHealth is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), and in June 2017 received a stunning inaugural Impact Factor of 4.636. The journal focusses on health and biomedical applications in mobile and tablet computing, pervasive and ubiquitous computing, wearable computing and domotics. JMIR mHealth and uHealth publishes since 2013 and was the first mhealth journal in Pubmed. It publishes even faster and has a broader scope with including papers which are more technical or more formative/developmental than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
期刊最新文献
WeChat-Based Intervention for Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Adapting and Validating Tools to Assess the Usability and Acceptability of mHealth Tools Among Community Health Workers in Rural Settings: Development and Usability Study. Video-Based Motion Capture Smartphone Apps for Testing Human Motor Performance Skills: Scoping Review. Effectiveness of Step Goal Personalization Strategies on Physical Activity in a Mobile Health App: A Field Study. Clinical Improvements From Telemedicine Interventions for Managing Type 2 Diabetes Compared With Usual Care: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1