Consumer wearable devices for evaluation of heart rate control using digoxin versus beta-blockers: the RATE-AF randomized trial

Consumer-grade wearable technology has the potential to support clinical research and patient management. Here, we report results from the RATE-AF trial wearables study, which was designed to compare heart rate in older, multimorbid patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and heart failure who were randomized to treatment with either digoxin or beta-blockers. Heart rate (n = 143,379,796) and physical activity (n = 23,704,307) intervals were obtained from 53 participants (mean age 75.6 years (s.d. 8.4), 40% women) using a wrist-worn wearable linked to a smartphone for 20 weeks. Heart rates in participants treated with digoxin versus beta-blockers were not significantly different (regression coefficient 1.22 (95% confidence interval (CI) −2.82 to 5.27; P = 0.55); adjusted 0.66 (95% CI −3.45 to 4.77; P = 0.75)). No difference in heart rate was observed between the two groups of patients after accounting for physical activity (P = 0.74) or patients with high activity levels (≥30,000 steps per week; P = 0.97). Using a convolutional neural network designed to account for missing data, we found that wearable device data could predict New York Heart Association functional class 5 months after baseline assessment similarly to standard clinical measures of electrocardiographic heart rate and 6-minute walk test (F1 score 0.56 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.70) versus 0.55 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.68); P = 0.88 for comparison). The results of this study indicate that digoxin and beta-blockers have equivalent effects on heart rate in atrial fibrillation at rest and on exertion, and suggest that dynamic monitoring of individuals with arrhythmia using wearable technology could be an alternative to in-person assessment. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02391337

Australia\u27s health 1994 : the fourth biennial report of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare

Australia\u27s Health is the most comprehensive and authoritative source of national information on health in Australia. Australia\u27s Health is published mid-year in even-numbered years and provides national statistics and related information that form a record of health status, service provision and expenditure in Australia

Consumer wearable devices for evaluation of heart rate control using digoxin versus beta-blockers: the RATE-AF randomized trial

Consumer-grade wearable technology has the potential to support clinical research and patient management. Here, we report results from the RATE-AF trial wearables study, which was designed to compare heart rate in older, multimorbid patients with permanent atrial fibrillation and heart failure who were randomized to treatment with either digoxin or beta-blockers. Heart rate (n = 143,379,796) and physical activity (n = 23,704,307) intervals were obtained from 53 participants (mean age 75.6 years (s.d. 8.4), 40% women) using a wrist-worn wearable linked to a smartphone for 20 weeks. Heart rates in participants treated with digoxin versus beta-blockers were not significantly different (regression coefficient 1.22 (95% confidence interval (CI) −2.82 to 5.27; P = 0.55); adjusted 0.66 (95% CI −3.45 to 4.77; P = 0.75)). No difference in heart rate was observed between the two groups of patients after accounting for physical activity (P = 0.74) or patients with high activity levels (≥30,000 steps per week; P = 0.97). Using a convolutional neural network designed to account for missing data, we found that wearable device data could predict New York Heart Association functional class 5 months after baseline assessment similarly to standard clinical measures of electrocardiographic heart rate and 6-minute walk test (F1 score 0.56 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.70) versus 0.55 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.68); P = 0.88 for comparison). The results of this study indicate that digoxin and beta-blockers have equivalent effects on heart rate in atrial fibrillation at rest and on exertion, and suggest that dynamic monitoring of individuals with arrhythmia using wearable technology could be an alternative to in-person assessment. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02391337

Books, reports & media reviews: Best practice in professional supervision: A guide for the helping professions

Book review of: Best practice in professional supervision: A guide for the helping professions / Allyson Davys & Liz Beddo

Lactation-focused audio relaxation versus standard care for mothers of very preterm infants (the EXPRESS randomized clinical trial)

Background: Mothers of very premature newborns often have low milk supply. Systematic review has shown increased milk quantity with relaxation interventions. We hypothesized that a self-directed audio relaxation and lactation-specific visualization would increase milk quantity after very premature birth. Methods: Unmasked, randomized, controlled trial, recruiting 132 participants in four United Kingdom neonatal units. Eligible women had given birth to one or two infants between 23+0 and 31+6 weeks of gestation. The intervention was a 12-minute voice recording including breathing exercises, muscle relaxation and lactation-specific visualization. Primary outcome was the highest 24-hour breastmilk weight expressed on any of day 4, day 14 or day 21 after birth. Results: Mean birth gestation was 27.8 weeks’ (SD 2.4), with 26% of participants giving birth under 26 weeks’ (34/132). Adjusted mean difference in primary outcome was 73.9 grams (95% CI -61.7 to 209.5, p=0.28). Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Index adjusted mean difference was -1.9 (-8.2 to 4.3, p=0.54). The majority of relaxation group participants felt the intervention was relaxing (32/42, 76%). Conclusion: There was no beneficial effect of this relaxation intervention on milk quantity. Mothers of very premature infants may value relaxation interventions but they are unlikely to have a large effect on milk quantity