Evidence Hub

i-CARE: A Smartphone-Based Intervention to Enhance Cardiac Rehabilitation in Coronary Artery Disease - A randomized controlled trial

P. Li, Doris S. F. Yu, B. S. Chan, C. W. Wong, C. W. Wong, Helena S. W. Chung

European Journal of Preventive Cardiology, 2025

294 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

AIM

The global shortage of healthcare professionals creates challenges in managing chronic diseases. This study evaluated a remotely delivered, theory-based self-care support intervention, "Internet-based CArdiac Rehabilitation Enhancement (i-CARE)", delivered through a smartphone application to enhance self-management in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

In this assessor-blinded, two-arm randomized controlled trial conducted at two regional hospitals in Hong Kong, community-dwelling adults with angiographically confirmed CAD were randomly assigned (1:1) to standard care or the i-CARE intervention. i-CARE included personalized risk assessment, skill-building, and app-based support to improve self-care behaviors. The primary outcome was change in CAD self-care behaviors, secondary outcomes were self-reported health status, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), physiological and biomarkers.

RESULTS

Of 294 participants randomized (n=147 per group), the i-CARE group showed significant greater improvements in self-care maintenance (ꞵ=4.055, 95%CI 1.420-6.691, p=0.003) and self-care confidence (ꞵ=5.609, 95%CI 1.089-10.129, p=0.015) at 3 months, sustained at 6 months. For secondary outcomes, the intervention also resulted in significant reductions in systolic (ꞵ=-3.725, 95%CI -7.322- -0.128, p=0.042) and diastolic (ꞵ= -2.153, 95%CI -4.228--0.079, p=0.042) blood pressure and improvements in HRQoL at 3 months (ꞵ=0.208, 95%CI 0.073-0.343, p=0.003), with persistent…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 294 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free