Cited by 88Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTechnology Use by Older AdultsCardiac Health and Mental Health

Mobile technology use across age groups in patients eligible for cardiac rehabilitation: survey study

Open access
Gallagher, Robyn, Roach, Kellie, Sadler, Leonie, Glinatsis, Helen, Belshaw, Julie, Kirkness, Ann, Zhang, Ling, Gallagher, Patrick +5 more·2017·JMIR mhealth and uhealth

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Emerging evidence indicates mobile technology-based strategies may improve access to secondary prevention and reduce risk factors in cardiac patients. However, little is known about cardiac patients' use of mobile technology, particularly for health reasons and whether the usage varies across patient demographics. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe cardiac patients' use of mobile technology and to determine variations between age groups after adjusting for education, employment, and confidence with using mobile technology. METHODS: Cardiac patients eligible for attending cardiac rehabilitation were recruited from 9 hospital and community sites across metropolitan and rural settings in New South Wales, Australia. Participants completed a survey on the use of mobile technology devices, features used, confidence with using mobile technology, willingness and interest in learning, and health-related use. RESULTS: The sample (N=282) had a mean age of 66.5 (standard deviation [SD] 10.6) years, 71.9% (203/282) were male, and 79.0% (223/282) lived in a metropolitan area. The most common diagnoses were percutaneous coronary intervention (33.3%, 94/282) and myocardial infarction (22.7%, 64/282). The majority (91.1%, 257/282) used at least one type of technology device, 70.9% (200/282) used mobile technology (mobile phone/tablet), and 31.9% (90/282) used all types. Technology was used by 54.6% (154/282) for health purposes, most often to access information on health conditions (41.4%, 117/282) and medications (34.8%, 98/282). Age had an important independent association with the use of mobile technology after adjusting for education, employment, and confidence. The youngest group (<56 years) was over 4 times more likely to use any mobile technology than the oldest (>69 years) age group (odds ratio [OR] 4.45, 95% CI 1.46-13.55), 5 times more likely to use mobile apps (OR 5.00, 95% CI 2.01-12.44), and 3 times more likely to use technology for health-related reasons (OR 3.31, 95% CI 1.34-8.18). Compared with the older group, the middle age group (56-69 years) was more than twice as likely to use any mobile technology (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.27-4.59) and mobile technology for health-related purposes (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.04-3.53). Participants who had completed high school were twice as likely to use mobile technology (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.45-4.70), mobile apps (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.09-3.84), and mobile technology for health-related reasons (OR 5.09, 95% CI 2.89-8.95) than those who had not completed high school. Associations were also present between participants living in metropolitan areas and mobile technology use (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.07-4.24) and employment and mobile app use (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.44-5.140). CONCLUSIONS: Mobile technology offers an important opportunity to improve access to secondary prevention for cardiac patients, particularly when modified to suit subgroups. High levels of mobile technology use and health motivation need to be harnessed for secondary prevention.

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/mhealth.8352

Cites

28 of 28 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?

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [15]Deloitte 2015 2017-10-08 Australian media and digital preferences - 4th edition https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/au/Documents/technology-media-telecommunications/deloitte-au-tmt-media-consumer-survey-2015-100815.pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gallagher, R., Roach, K., Sadler, L., Glinatsis, H., Belshaw, J., Kirkness, A., Zhang, L., Gallagher, P., Paull, G., Gao, Y., Partridge, S. R., Parker, H., & Neubeck, L.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Northern Sydney Local Health District (AU)
  • Manly Hospital (AU)
  • Royal North Shore Hospital (AU)
  • Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Hospital (AU)
  • St George Hospital (AU)
  • Edinburgh Napier University (GB)
Corresponding author
Gallagher, Robyn
Venue
JMIR mhealth and uhealth
Published
2017-10-24
Volume
5
Issue
10
Pages
e161
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2766397352
Cited by
88
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8
FWCI
10.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Output (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Edinburgh Napier Research Repository (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
mobile technology use, cardiac rehabilitation, cardiac patients, age differences, mobile health apps, secondary prevention, health information seeking, drug information, technology confidence, older adults, digital divide, education and employment, percutaneous coronary intervention, myocardial infarction, New South Wales, risk factor reduction

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