Chiara Tessari, Valentina Esenia, Marco Andreis, Andrea Bagno, Gino Gerosa
Heart transplant recipients demonstrate substantial but conditional readiness for digital health adoption. Successful implementation appears to depend not only on access, but also on clinician integration, task-specific confidence, and transparent, patient-controlled data governance. These findings support a staged, human-centered implementation approach rather than technology substitution for established clinical relationships.
BACKGROUND: Digital health may support continuous, personalized follow-up after heart transplantation; however, successful implementation depends on patient trust, digital confidence, and acceptable data-governance arrangements.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize digital access, perceived usefulness, trust, privacy concerns, and implementation readiness among adult heart transplant recipients, and to explore differences across demographic and technology-use subgroups.
METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, consecutive adult heart transplant recipients attending routine follow-up at a tertiary center completed a 43-item questionnaire developed through literature-informed item generation, multidisciplinary expert review, and pilot testing in 5 transplant recipients. Responses were summarized descriptively. Exploratory subgroup comparisons used Pearson chi-square or Fisher exact tests, as appropriate. As multiple comparisons were exploratory, p-values were interpreted as hypothesis-generating.
RESULTS: Ninety-three recipients participated; 61 (65.6%) were male and 74 (79.6%) were older than 45 years. Smartphone use was common (85/93, 91.4%), whereas wearable use remained limited (18/93, 19.4%). Most respondents agreed that technology could improve health monitoring (69/92, 75.0%), and 69/93 (74.2%) considered digital tools more useful and reliable when incorporating guidance from their treating clinicians. Nevertheless, 29/93 (31.2%) expressed discomfort with device-led monitoring, and 49/92 (53.3%) preferred physician advice over app-based guidance. Concerns about data misuse were reported by 44/93 (47.3%), although 72/93 (77.4%) supported data use for clinical research and 69/93 (74.2%) valued revocable consent. Perceived usefulness differed significantly by sex (males 83.3% vs. females 59.4%, p = 0.023). Medication-related insecurity and preference for physician advice varied across age groups (p = 0.029 and p = 0.030, respectively). Greater daily technology use was associated with less medication-related insecurity and less discomfort with monitoring (p = 0.009 and p = 0.022).
CONCLUSIONS: Heart transplant recipients demonstrate substantial but conditional readiness for digital health adoption. Successful implementation appears to depend not only on access, but also on clinician integration, task-specific confidence, and transparent, patient-controlled data governance. These findings support a staged, human-centered implementation approach rather than technology substitution for established clinical relationships.