Associations of Demographic, Socioeconomic, and Cognitive Characteristics With Mobile Health Access: MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis)

Reshmi J S Patel, Jie Ding, Francoise A Marvel, Rongzi Shan, Timothy B Plante, Michael J Blaha, Wendy S Post, Seth S Martin, Reshmi J S Patel, Jie Ding, Francoise A Marvel, Rongzi Shan, Timothy B Plante, Michael J Blaha, Wendy S Post, Seth S Martin

Abstract

Background Mobile health (mHealth) has an emerging role in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. This study evaluated possible inequities in mHealth access in older adults. Methods and Results mHealth access was assessed from 2019 to 2020 in MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) telephone surveys of 2796 participants aged 62 to 102 years. A multivariable logistic regression model adjusted for general health status assessed associations of mHealth access measures with relevant demographic, socioeconomic, and cognitive characteristics. There were lower odds of all access measures with older age (odds ratios [ORs], 0.37-0.59 per 10 years) and annual income <$50 000 (versus ≥$50 000 ORs, 0.55-0.62), and higher odds with higher Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument Score (ORs, 1.22-1.29 per 5 points). Men (versus women) had higher odds of internet access (OR, 1.32 [95% CI,1.05-1.66]) and computing device ownership (OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.05-1.63]) but lower fitness tracker ownership odds (OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49-0.89]). For internet access and computing device ownership, we saw lower odds for Hispanic participants (versus White participants OR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.44-0.85]; OR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.50-0.95]) and less than a high school education (versus bachelor's degree or higher OR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.18-0.40]; OR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.28-0.62]). For internet access, lower odds were seen for Black participants (versus White participants OR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.47-0.86]) and other health insurance (versus health maintenance organization/private OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.47-0.74]). Chinese participants (versus White participants) had lower internet access odds (OR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.44-0.91]) but higher computing device ownership odds (OR, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.28-2.77]). Conclusions Among older-age adults, mHealth access varied by major demographic, socioeconomic, and cognitive characteristics, suggesting a digital divide. Novel mHealth interventions should consider individual access barriers. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT00005487.

Keywords: cardiovascular disease; mHealth; mobile health; prevention.

Figures

Figure 1. Flow diagram to select eligible…
Figure 1. Flow diagram to select eligible cohort for analysis.
MESA indicates Multi‐Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis; and mHealth, mobile health.
Figure 2. Timeline of all examinations and…
Figure 2. Timeline of all examinations and assessments.
The MESA (Multi‐Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) Examination 1 was the baseline examination for all participants, and Examinations 5 and 6 were 2 follow‐up examinations. All 3 examinations were administered in person at a MESA site, as was the Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument assessment. MESA Follow‐Up 21, which included the mobile health (mHealth) survey, was administered by telephone.
Figure 3. Multivariable logistic regression model for…
Figure 3. Multivariable logistic regression model for association between mobile health outcomes and demographic, socioeconomic, and cognitive characteristics.
The model was adjusted for all exposure variables including age, sex, race and ethnicity, family income, education level, health insurance status, and Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument (CASI) score, and a confounding variable, general health status. Computing device includes smartphone, laptop, desktop, and tablet. Fitness tracker includes Fitbit, Apple Watch, and similar devices. Odds ratios with 95% CIs are shown on a logarithmic scale. HMO indicates health maintenance organization.

References

    1. Steinhubl SR, Muse ED, Topol EJ. The emerging field of mobile health. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7:283rv3. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaa3487
    1. Urrea B, Misra S, Plante TB, Kelli HM, Misra S, Blaha MJ, Martin SS. Mobile health initiatives to improve outcomes in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2015;17:59. doi: 10.1007/s11936-015-0417-7
    1. Schorr EN, Gepner AD, Dolansky MA, Forman DE, Park LG, Petersen KS, Still CH, Wang TY, Wenger NK. Harnessing mobile health technology for secondary cardiovascular disease prevention in older adults: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2021;14:e000103. doi: 10.1161/HCQ.0000000000000103
    1. Kozik M, Isakadze N, Martin SS. Mobile health in preventive cardiology: current status and future perspective. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2021;36:580–588. doi: 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000891
    1. Sarwar CMS, Vaduganathan M, Anker SD, Coiro S, Papadimitriou L, Saltz J, Schoenfeld ER, Clark RL, Dinh W, Kramer F, et al. Mobile health applications in cardiovascular research. Int J Cardiol. 2018;269:265–271. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.06.039
    1. Shan R, Ding J, Plante TB, Martin SS. Mobile health access and use among individuals with or at risk for cardiovascular disease: 2018 health information National Trends Survey (HINTS). J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8:e014390. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.014390
    1. Neubeck L, Lowres N, Benjamin EJ, Ben Freedman S, Coorey G, Redfern J. The mobile revolution—Using smartphone apps to prevent cardiovascular disease. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2015;12:350–360. doi: 10.1038/nrcardio.2015.34
    1. Pew Research Center . Mobile Fact Sheet. 2019. Available at: . Accessed June 24, 2021.
    1. Pew Research Center . Internet/Broadband Fact Sheet. 2019. Available at: . Accessed June 24, 2021.
    1. Pew Research Center . About one‐in‐five Americans use a smart watch or fitness tracker. 2020. Available at: . Accessed June 24, 2021.
    1. Desilva J, Prensky‐Pomeranz R, Zweig M. Rock health . Digital Health Consumer Adoption Report 2020. 2020. Available at: . Accessed August 26, 2021.
    1. Lee J. The impact of health information technology on disparity of process of care. Int J Equity Health. 2015;14:34. doi: 10.1186/s12939-015-0161-3
    1. Norris P. Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge University Press; 2001. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139164887
    1. Pew Research Center . Smartphones help blacks, Hispanics bridge some – But not all – Digital gaps with whites. 2019. Available at: . Accessed June 31, 2021.
    1. Pew Research Center . Digital divide persists even as lower‐income Americans make gains in tech adoption. 2019. Available at: . Accessed June 31, 2021.
    1. Pew Research Center . Technology use among seniors. 2017. Available at: . Accessed June 31, 2021.
    1. Wu YH, Lewis M, Rigaud AS. Cognitive function and digital device use in older adults attending a memory clinic. Gerontol Geriatr Med. 2019;5:2333721419844886.
    1. Bostrom J, Sweeney G, Whiteson J, Dodson JA. Mobile health and cardiac rehabilitation in older adults. Clin Cardiol. 2020;43:118–126. doi: 10.1002/clc.23306
    1. Graham G. Disparities in cardiovascular disease risk in the United States. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2015;11:238–245.
    1. Pool LR, Ning H, Lloyd‐Jones DM, Allen NB. Trends in racial/ethnic disparities in cardiovascular health among US adults from 1999‐2012. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e006027. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.006027
    1. Min YI, Anugu P, Butler KR, Hartley TA, Mwasongwe S, Norwood AF, Sims M, Wang W, Winters KP, Correa A. Cardiovascular disease burden and socioeconomic correlates: findings from the Jackson heart study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e004416. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.004416
    1. Jabour AM, Rehman W, Idrees S, Thanganadar H, Hira K, Alarifi MA. The adoption of mobile health applications among university students in health colleges. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2021;14:1267–1273. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S310539
    1. Bender MS, Choi J, Arai S, Paul SM, Gonzalez P, Fukuoka Y. Digital technology ownership, usage, and factors predicting downloading health apps among caucasian, filipino, korean, and latino Americans: the digital link to health survey. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2014;2:e43. doi: 10.2196/mhealth.3710
    1. Giacobbi P Jr, Cushing P, Popa A, Haggerty T, Hansell A, Sedney C. Mobile health (mHealth) use or non‐use by residents of West Virginia. South Med J. 2018;111:625–627. doi: 10.14423/SMJ.0000000000000879
    1. Langford AT, Solid CA, Scott E, Lad M, Maayan E, Williams SK, Seixas AA. Mobile phone ownership, health apps, and tablet use in US adults with a self‐reported history of hypertension: cross‐sectional study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019;7:e12228. doi: 10.2196/12228
    1. Serrano KJ, Yu M, Riley WT, Patel V, Hughes P, Marchesini K, Atienza AA. Willingness to exchange health information via Mobile devices: findings from a population‐based survey. Ann Fam Med. 2016;14:34–40. doi: 10.1370/afm.1888
    1. Ernsting C, Dombrowski SU, Oedekoven M, O Sullivan JL, Kanzler M, Kuhlmey A, Gellert P. Using smartphones and health apps to change and manage health behaviors: a population‐based survey. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(e101):e101. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6838
    1. Rising CJ, Jensen RE, Moser RP, Oh A. Characterizing the US population by patterns of mobile health use for health and behavioral tracking: analysis of the National Cancer Institute's health information national trends survey data. J Med Internet Res. 2020;22:e16299. doi: 10.2196/16299
    1. Christiansen L, Sanmartin Berglund J, Anderberg P, Cellek S, Zhang J, Lemmens E, Garolera M, Mayoral‐Cleries F, Skär L. Associations between mobile health technology use and self‐rated quality of life: a cross‐sectional study on older adults with cognitive impairment. Gerontol Geriatr Med. 2021;7:23337214211018924. doi: 10.1177/23337214211018924
    1. Vangeepuram N, Mayer V, Fei K, Hanlen‐Rosado E, Andrade C, Wright S, Horowitz C. Smartphone ownership and perspectives on health apps among a vulnerable population in East Harlem, New York. Mhealth. 2018;4:31. doi: 10.21037/mhealth.2018.07.02
    1. Bild DE, Bluemke DA, Burke GL, Detrano R, Diez Roux AV, Folsom AR, Greenland P, Jacob DR Jr, Kronmal R, Liu K, et al. Multi‐ethnic study of atherosclerosis: objectives and design. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:871–881. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwf113
    1. Teng EL, Hasegawa K, Homma A, Imai Y, Larson E, Graves A, Sugimoto K, Yamaguchi T, Sasaki H, Chiu D. The cognitive abilities screening instrument (CASI): a practical test for cross‐cultural epidemiological studies of dementia. Int Psychogeriatr. 1994;6:45–62. doi: 10.1017/S1041610294001602
    1. Kaiser DW, Harrington RA, Turakhia MP. Wearable fitness trackers and heart disease. JAMA Cardiol. 2016;1:239. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.0354
    1. Roberts LM, Jaeger BC, Baptista LC, Harper SA, Gardner AK, Jackson EA, Pekmezi D, Sandesara B, Manini TM, Anton SD, et al. Wearable technology to reduce sedentary behavior and CVD risk in older adults: a pilot randomized clinical trial. Clin Interv Aging. 2019;14:1817–1828.
    1. Peng W, Li L, Kononova A, Cotten S, Kamp K, Bowen M. Habit formation in wearable activity tracker use among older adults: qualitative study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021;9:e22488. doi: 10.2196/22488
    1. FDA . General wellness: Policy for low risk devices guidance for industry and Food and Drug Administration staff. 2019. Available at: . Accessed June 31, 2021.
    1. Tedesco S, Barton J, O'Flynn B. A review of activity trackers for senior citizens: research perspectives, commercial landscape and the role of the insurance industry. Sensors (Basel). 2017;17:1277. doi: 10.3390/s17061277
    1. Macridis S, Johnston N, Johnson S, Vallance JK. Consumer physical activity tracking device ownership and use among a population‐based sample of adults. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0189298. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189298
    1. Ek S. Gender differences in health information behaviour: a Finnish population‐based survey. Health Promot Int. 2015; 30:736–745. 10.1093/heapro/dat063.
    1. Assari S. Health disparities due to diminished return among black Americans: public policy solutions. Soc Issu Policy Rev. 2018;12:112–145. doi: 10.1111/sipr.12042
    1. Sellers SL, Neighbors HW, Bonham VL. Goal‐striving stress and the mental health of college‐educated black American men: the protective effects of system‐blame. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2011;81:507–518. doi: 10.1111/j.1939-0025.2011.01116.x
    1. Raber I, McCarthy CP, Yeh RW. Health insurance and mobile health devices: opportunities and concerns. JAMA. 2019;321:1767–1768. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.3353
    1. U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs . Connecting Veterans to Telehealth Care and Bridging the Digital Divide. n.d. Available at: . Accessed August 30, 2021.
    1. Lifeline Support for Affordable Communications . n.d. Available at: . Accessed June 28, 2021.
    1. Internet Essentials . Affordable Internet at Home for Eligible Households. n.d. Available at: . Accessed June 28, 2021.
    1. Yang WE, Spaulding EM, Lumelsky D, Hung G, Huynh PP, Knowles K, Marvel FA, Vilarino V, Wang J, Shah LM, et al. Strategies for the successful implementation of a novel iPhone loaner system (iShare) in mHealth interventions: prospective study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019;7:e16391. doi: 10.2196/16391
    1. Wildenbos GA, Peute L, Jaspers M. Aging barriers influencing mobile health usability for older adults: a literature based framework (MOLD‐US). Int J Med Inform. 2018;114:66–75. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2018.03.012
    1. Elfaki AO, Alotaibi M. The role of M‐health applications in the fight against Alzheimer's: current and future directions. Mhealth. 2018; 4:32. doi: 10.21037/mhealth.2018.07.03
    1. Lively Direct . Lively Cell Phones for Seniors & Lively Mobile Plus. n.d. Available at: . Accessed August 29, 2021.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj