Cited by 36Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesMedication Adherence and ComplianceMobile Health and mHealth Applications

A Smartphone App to Improve Oral Anticoagulation Adherence in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Prospective Observational Study

Open access
Senoo, Keitaro, Miki, Tomonori, Ohkura, Takashi, Iwakoshi, Hibiki, Nishimura, Tetsuro, Shiraishi, Hirokazu, Teramukai, Satoshi, Matoba, Satoaki·2022·JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Poor adherence to oral anticoagulation in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has been shown to negatively impact health care costs, morbidity, and mortality. Although various methods such as automated reminders, counseling, telephone support, and patient education have been effective in improving medication adherence, the burden on health care providers has been considerable. Recently, an attempt has been made to improve medication adherence without burdening health care providers by using smartphone apps; however, the use of the app for elderly patients with AF is still limited. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the newly developed smartphone app for patients with AF (the Smart AF), which integrates education, automatic reminder, and patient engagement strategies with a simple user interface, can improve medication adherence in elderly patients with AF. METHODS: Patient enrollment was carried out by obtaining informed consent from patients with AF attending Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine hospital between May 2019 and September 2020. Follow-up was planned at 1, 3, and 6 months after enrollment, and questionnaire reminders were automatically sent to patient apps at designated follow-up time points. A questionnaire-based survey of medication adherence was performed electronically using the self-reported 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) as the survey tool. RESULTS: A total of 136 patients with AF were enrolled in this study. During the follow-up period, 112 (82%) patients underwent follow-up at 1 month, 107 (79%) at 3 months, and 96 (71%) at 6 months. The mean age of the enrolled patients was 64.3 years (SD 9.6), and male participants accounted for 79.4% (108/136) of the study population. The mean CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age, diabetes, previous stroke, or transient ischemic attack) score was 1.2, with hypertension being the most common comorbidity. At the time of enrollment, 126 (93%) and 10 (7%) patients were taking direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin, respectively. For medication adherence as measured according to the MMAS-8, MMAS scores at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months were significantly improved compared with baseline MMAS scores (all P values less than .01). The overall improvement in medication adherence achieved by the 6-month intervention was as follows: 77.8% (14/18) of the patients in the high adherence group (score=8) at baseline remained in the same state, 45.3% (24/53) of the patients in the medium adherence group (score=6 to <8) at baseline moved to the high adherence group, and 72% (18/25) of the patients in the low adherence group (score <6) moved to either the medium or high adherence group. CONCLUSIONS: The Smart AF app improved medication adherence among elderly patients with AF. In the realm of medication management, an approach using a mobile health technology that emphasizes education, automatic reminder, and patient engagement may be helpful.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/30807

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Senoo et al. found that app users had a significantly higher adherence rate (92.3%) compared to non-users (78.6%, p < 0.01) in atrial fibrillation patients.

    “Their prospective observational study found that app users had a significantly higher adherence rate (92.3%) compared to non-users (78.6%, p < 0.01), suggesting that digital tools can enhance medication management in elderly populations [46].”

    From Multilevel Interventions to Improve Medication Adherence in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cognitive, Digital, Behavioral, and Socioeconomic Strategies (2015–2025) (2026) · cites this paper as [46]

    The Results (page not provided) report significantly improved adherence among patients using the app compared with their own baseline (P<.01). The Methods describe a baseline-to-follow-up comparison, not an app-user versus non-user comparison; the paper does not report adherence rates of 92.3% and 78.6% for those groups. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Digital tools can enhance medication management in elderly populations.

    “Their prospective observational study found that app users had a significantly higher adherence rate (92.3%) compared to non-users (78.6%, p < 0.01), suggesting that digital tools can enhance medication management in elderly populations [46].”

    From Multilevel Interventions to Improve Medication Adherence in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cognitive, Digital, Behavioral, and Socioeconomic Strategies (2015–2025) (2026) · cites this paper as [46]

    The Discussion (Main Findings; page not provided) reports improved medication adherence among Smart AF app users with atrial fibrillation, supporting the suggestion that a digital tool can help this patient group. But the Results compare users with their own baseline, not with non-users, and do not report the cited 92.3% versus 78.6% adherence rates; the finding also does not establish an effect across elderly populations generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Senoo, K., Miki, T., Ohkura, T., Iwakoshi, H., Nishimura, T., Shiraishi, H., Teramukai, S., & Matoba, S.
Affiliations
Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine (JP)
Corresponding author
Senoo, Keitaro
Venue
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Published
2022-01-07
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
e30807
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4200294748
Cited by
36
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8
FWCI
4.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, oral anticoagulation, medication adherence, mobile application, automated reminders, patient engagement, elderly patients, warfarin, direct oral anticoagulants, Morisky Medication Adherence Scale, patient education, digital health interventions, CHADS2 score, stroke prevention, follow-up retention, user interface design
MeSH terms
Aged, Anticoagulants, Atrial Fibrillation, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Stroke, Medication Adherence, Mobile Applications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review