Alcuni abstract di articoli che trattano argomenti relativi all'eHealth

Non utile per esam

eHealth interventions for people with chronic kidney disease

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: This review aims to look at the benefits and harms of using eHealth interventions in the CKD population

Supporting Self-Management of Cardiovascular Diseases Through Remote Monitoring Technologies:Metaethnography Review of Frameworks, Models, and Theories Used in Research and Development

Background: Electronic health (eHealth) is a rapidly evolving field informed by multiple scientific disciplines. Because of this, the use of different terms and concepts to explain the same phenomena and lack of standardization in reporting interventions often leaves a gap that hinders knowledge accumulation. Interventions focused on self-management support of cardiovascular diseases through the use of remote monitoring technologies are a cross-disciplinary area potentially affected by this gap. A review of the underlying frameworks, models, and theories that have informed projects at this crossroad could advance future research and development efforts. Objective: This research aimed to identify and compare underlying approaches that have informed interventions focused on self-management support of cardiovascular diseases through the use of remote monitoring technologies. The objective was to achieve an understanding of the distinct approaches by highlighting common or conflicting principles, guidelines, and methods. Methods: The metaethnography approach was used to review and synthesize researchers' reports on how they applied frameworks, models, and theories in their projects. Literature was systematically searched in 7 databases: Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Association for Computing Machinery Digital Library, and Cochrane Library. Included studies were thoroughly read and coded to extract data for the synthesis. Studies were mainly related by the key ingredients of the underlying approaches they applied. The key ingredients were finally translated across studies and synthesized into thematic clusters. Results: Of 1224 initial results, 17 articles were included. The articles described research and development of 10 different projects. Frameworks, models, and theories (n=43) applied by the projects were identified. Key ingredients (n=293) of the included articles were mapped to the following themes of eHealth development: (1) it is a participatory process; (2) it creates new infrastructures for improving health care, health, and well-being; (3) it is intertwined with implementation; (4) it integrates theory, evidence, and participatory approaches for persuasive design; (5) it requires continuous evaluation cycles; (6) it targets behavior change; (7) it targets technology adoption; and (8) it targets health-related outcomes. Conclusions: The findings of this review support and exemplify the numerous possibilities in the use of frameworks, models, and theories to guide research and development of eHealth. Participatory, user-centered design, and integration with empirical evidence and theoretical modeling were widely identified principles in the literature. On the contrary, less attention has been given to the integration of implementation in the development process and supporting novel eHealth-based health care infrastructures. To better integrate theory and evidence, holistic approaches can combine patient-centered studies with consolidated knowledge from expert-based approaches

Patient characteristics associated with objective measures of digital health tool use in the United States: A literature review.

The study sought to determine which patient characteristics are associated with the use of patient-facing digital health tools in the United States.We conducted a literature review of studies of patient-facing digital health tools that objectively evaluated use (eg, system/platform data representing frequency of use) by patient characteristics (eg, age, race or ethnicity, income, digital literacy). We included any type of patient-facing digital health tool except patient portals. We reran results using the subset of studies identified as having robust methodology to detect differences in patient characteristics.We included 29 studies; 13 had robust methodology. Most studies examined smartphone apps and text messaging programs for chronic disease management and evaluated only 1-3 patient characteristics, primarily age and gender. Overall, the majority of studies found no association between patient characteristics and use. Among the subset with robust methodology, white race and poor health status appeared to be associated with higher use.Given the substantial investment in digital health tools, it is surprising how little is known about the types of patients who use them. Strategies that engage diverse populations in digital health tool use appear to be needed.Few studies evaluate objective measures of digital health tool use by patient characteristics, and those that do include a narrow range of characteristics. Evidence suggests that resources and need drive use

Evaluating the impact of physical activity apps and wearables: interdisciplinary review

Background: Although many smartphone apps and wearables have been designed to improve physical activity, their rapidly evolving nature and complexity present challenges for evaluating their impact. Traditional methodologies, such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs), can be slow. To keep pace with rapid technological development, evaluations of mobile health technologies must be efficient. Rapid alternative research designs have been proposed, and efficient in-app data collection methods, including in-device sensors and device-generated logs, are available. Along with effectiveness, it is important to measure engagement (ie, users’ interaction and usage behavior) and acceptability (ie, users’ subjective perceptions and experiences) to help explain how and why apps and wearables work. Objectives: This study aimed to (1) explore the extent to which evaluations of physical activity apps and wearables: employ rapid research designs; assess engagement, acceptability, as well as effectiveness; use efficient data collection methods; and (2) describe which dimensions of engagement and acceptability are assessed. Method: An interdisciplinary scoping review using 8 databases from health and computing sciences. Included studies measured physical activity, and evaluated physical activity apps or wearables that provided sensor-based feedback. Results were analyzed using descriptive numerical summaries, chi-square testing, and qualitative thematic analysis. Results: A total of 1829 abstracts were screened, and 858 articles read in full. Of 111 included studies, 61 (55.0%) were published between 2015 and 2017. Most (55.0%, 61/111) were RCTs, and only 2 studies (1.8%) used rapid research designs: 1 single-case design and 1 multiphase optimization strategy. Other research designs included 23 (22.5%) repeated measures designs, 11 (9.9%) nonrandomized group designs, 10 (9.0%) case studies, and 4 (3.6%) observational studies. Less than one-third of the studies (32.0%, 35/111) investigated effectiveness, engagement, and acceptability together. To measure physical activity, most studies (90.1%, 101/111) employed sensors (either in-device [67.6%, 75/111] or external [23.4%, 26/111]). RCTs were more likely to employ external sensors (accelerometers: P=.005). Studies that assessed engagement (52.3%, 58/111) mostly used device-generated logs (91%, 53/58) to measure the frequency, depth, and length of engagement. Studies that assessed acceptability (57.7%, 64/111) most often used questionnaires (64%, 42/64) and/or qualitative methods (53%, 34/64) to explore appreciation, perceived effectiveness and usefulness, satisfaction, intention to continue use, and social acceptability. Some studies (14.4%, 16/111) assessed dimensions more closely related to usability (ie, burden of sensor wear and use, interface complexity, and perceived technical performance). Conclusions: The rapid increase of research into the impact of physical activity apps and wearables means that evaluation guidelines are urgently needed to promote efficiency through the use of rapid research designs, in-device sensors and user-logs to assess effectiveness, engagement, and acceptability. Screening articles was time-consuming because reporting across health and computing sciences lacked standardization. Reporting guidelines are therefore needed to facilitate the synthesis of evidence across disciplines

Moving towards Sustainable Electronic Health Applications

Electronic healthcare applications, both web-based and mobile health (mHealth) provide new modalities for chronic disease. These tools allow patients to track their symptoms and help them manage their condition. The sustainability of these tools is often not considered during their development. To ensure these applications can be adopted and sustainable, where policy differs amongst states and provinces, we must present the benefits of our findings to highlight the justification for its development. For technology to be sustainable it has to utilize infrastructure that is secure, stable and to be agile so that it can be deployed quickly with minimal interruption to patients, family members and healthcare professionals

What is eHealth?

Non utile per esam

Consumer Health Informatics: Empowering Healthy-Lifestyle-Seekers Through mHealth

People are at risk from noncommunicable diseases (NCD) and poor health habits, with interventions like medications and surgery carrying further risk of adverse effects. This paper addresses ways people are increasingly moving to healthy living medicine (HLM) to mitigate such health threats. HLM-seekers increasingly leverage mobile technologies that enable control of personal health information, collaboration with clinicians/other agents to establish healthy living practices. For example, outcomes from consumer health informatics research include empowering users to take charge of their health through active participation in decision-making about healthcare delivery. Because the success of health technology depends on its alignment/integration with a person's sociotechnical system, we introduce SEIPS 2.0 as a useful conceptual model and analytic tool. SEIPS 2.0 approaches human work (i.e., life's effortful activities) within the complexity of the design and implementation of mHealth technologies and their potential to emerge as consumer-facing NLM products that support NCDs like diabetes

Targeted, structured text messaging to improve dietary and lifestyle behaviours for people on maintenance haemodialysis (KIDNEYTEXT): Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Introduction Managing nutrition is critical for reducing morbidity and mortality in patients on haemodialysis but adherence to the complex dietary restrictions remains problematic. Innovative interventions to enhance the delivery of nutritional care are needed. The aim of this phase II trial is to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a targeted mobile phone text messaging system to improve dietary and lifestyle behaviours in patients on long-term haemodialysis. Methods and analysis Single-blinded randomised controlled trial with 6 months of follow-up in 130 patients on haemodialysis who will be randomised to either standard care or KIDNEYTEXT. The KIDNEYTEXT intervention group will receive three text messages per week for 6 months. The text messages provide customised dietary information and advice based on renal dietary guidelines and general healthy eating dietary guidelines, and motivation and support to improve behaviours. The primary outcome is feasibility including recruitment rate, drop-out rate, adherence to renal dietary recommendations, participant satisfaction and a process evaluation using semistructured interviews with a subset of purposively sampled participants. Secondary and exploratory outcomes include a range of clinical and behavioural outcomes and a healthcare utilisation cost analysis will be undertaken. Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee-Westmead. Results will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed publications. Trial registration number ACTRN12617001084370; Pre-results