Monitoring of home recovery using the 317-nursing mobile application following day-case surgery in children

Li, Canping; Huang, Shoujiang; Su, Xiaohua; Zhang, Tingting; Jiang, Kewen

doi:10.1097/md.0000000000016639

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Telemedicine was used in surgery for clinical care, appointment reminders, patient education, and provider training. Clinical care included pre‐operative assessment ( n = 10, 5.6%) [24–33], post‐operative assessment ( n = 71, 39.9%) [34–105], and provider‐provider consultations ( n = 16, 9.0%) [106–121] (Table 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Telemedicine in Surgical Care in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: A Scoping Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Access to timely and quality surgical care is limited in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Telemedicine, defined as the remote provision of health care using information, communication and telecommunication platforms have the potential to address some of the barriers to surgical care. However, synthesis of evidence on telemedicine use in surgical care in LMICs is lacking. Aim To describe the current state of evidence on the use and distribution of telemedicine for surgical care in LMICs. Methods This was a scoping review of published and relevant grey literature on telemedicine use for surgical care in LMICs, following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guideline. PubMed-Medline, Web of Science, Scopus and African Journals Online databases were searched using a comprehensive search strategy from 1 January 2010 to 28 February 2021. Results A total of 178 articles from 53 (38.7%) LMICs across 11 surgical specialties were included. The number of published articles increased from 2 in 2010 to 44 in 2020. The highest number of studies was from the World Health Organization Western Pacific region ( n = 73; 41.0%) and of these, most were from China ( n = 69; 94.5%). The most common telemedicine platforms used were telephone call ( n = 71, 39.9%), video chat ( n = 42, 23.6%) and WhatsApp/WeChat ( n = 31, 17.4%). Telemedicine was mostly used for post-operative follow-up ( n = 71, 39.9%), patient education ( n = 32, 18.0%), provider training ( n = 28, 15.7%) and provider-provider consultation ( n = 16, 9.0%). Less than a third ( n = 51, 29.1%) of the studies used a randomised controlled trial design, and only 23 (12.9%) reported effects on clinical outcomes. Conclusion Telemedicine use for surgical care is emerging in LMICs, especially for post-operative visits. Basic platforms such as telephone calls and 2-way texting were successfully used for post-operative follow-up and education. In addition, file sharing and video chatting options were added when a physical assessment was required. Telephone calls and 2-way texting platforms should be leveraged to reduce loss to follow-up of surgical patients in LMICs and their use for pre-operative visits should be further explored. Despite these telemedicine potentials, there remains an uneven adoption across several LMICs. Also, up to two-thirds of the studies were of low-to-moderate quality with only a few focusing on clinical effectiveness. There is a need to further adopt, develop, and validate telemedicine use for surgical care in LMICs, particularly its impact on clinical outcomes. Supplementary Information The online version co...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Telemedicine in Surgical Care in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: A Scoping Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Digital devices were implemented across 3 main settings: outpatient health clinics (12/39, 31%), hospitals (ie, inpatient units and emergency departments; 14/39, 36%), and community outreach (ie, community spaces that were not formal health clinics; 10/39, 26%) or a combination of these settings (3/39, 8%). [53] Community outreach English and Arabic Urban Gaza 6-18 years Hashemi et al, 2017 [7] Outpatient health clinic Dutch Urban (55%) and rural (45%) Netherlands 10-19 years Heida et al, 2018 [62] Outpatient health clinic English Urban United States 0-21 years Hussey and Flynn, 2019 [41] Outpatient health clinic English Urban (85%) and rural (15%) Australia 16-24 years Iorfino et al, 2017 [8] Hospital, outpatient health clinic, and community outreach Korean Urban South Korea 15-19 years Jeong et al, 2020 [40] Community outreach English NR United States 3-22 years Jiam et al, 2017 [66] Hospital English Urban (50%) and rural (50%) United States 6-14 years Kassam-Adams et al, 2019 [42] Community outreach NR NR South Korea 0-5 years Kim et al, 2019 [60] Hospital Mandarin Urban China 1-18 years Li et al, 2019 [63] Outpatient health clinic and community outreach English Urban Australia 5-12 years March et al, 2018 [17] Community outreach Lusoga and English Rural Uganda 0-7 days Matin et al, 2020 [59] Hospital English NR United States 0-2 months McCulloh et al, 2018 [49] Community outreach Twi Urban Ghana 0-5 years Mohammed et al, 2018 [9] Hospital NR Urban Iran 0-9 days Padidar et al, 2019 [64] Community outreach Arab, Farsi, and Russian NR Germany 0-24 years Rath et al, 2018 [45] Hospital NR Urban Germany and Greece 0-5 years Rath et al, 2019 [65] Setting Language used in the device Locality a Country Age range of children Study Outpatient health clinic English Urban (50%) and rural (50%) Australia 14-24 years Reid et al, 2011 [43] Hospital and outpatient health clinic Hindi, Gujarati, and English Urban (85%) and rural (15%) India 0-2 years Singh et al, 2017 [51] Hospital Swedish Urban (50%) and rural (50%) Sweden 6-13 years Svedberg et al, 2019 [46] Outpatient health clinic English NR New Zealand 13-14 years Thabrew et al, 2019 [44] Community outreach 11 languages NR 10 countries 0-17 years Thabtah, 2018 [54] Outpatient health clinic English Urban United States 12-18 years Thompson et al, 2016 [47] Community outreach English Rural Uganda and United States…”

Section: Demographics Of Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The findings of Singh [51] supported a configurable or individualized approach, with the researchers concluding that individualization was critical to the clinical utility and safety of eHealth tools. Despite studies identifying challenges and risks, there was minimal discussion on how to address the identified issues; moreover, just under a quarter of studies did not report any potential risks or challenges of implementing the device [17,38,43,47,49,54,[63][64][65].…”

Section: Principal Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

eHealth Tools That Assess and Track Health and Well-being in Children and Young People: Systematic Review

Stewart¹,

Milton²,

Yee³

et al. 2022

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background eHealth tools that assess and track health outcomes in children or young people are an emerging type of technology that has the potential to reform health service delivery and facilitate integrated, interdisciplinary care. Objective The aim of this review is to summarize eHealth tools that have assessed and tracked health in children or young people to provide greater clarity around the populations and settings in which they have been used, characteristics of digital devices (eg, health domains, respondents, presence of tracking, and connection to care), primary outcomes, and risks and challenges of implementation. Methods A search was conducted in PsycINFO, PubMed or MEDLINE, and Embase in April 2020. Studies were included if they evaluated a digital device whose primary purpose was to assess and track health, focused on children or young people (birth to the age of 24 years), reported original research, and were published in peer-reviewed journals in English. Results A total of 39 papers were included in this review. The sample sizes ranged from 7 to 149,329 participants (median 163, mean 5155). More studies were conducted in urban (18/39, 46%) regions than in rural (3/39, 8%) regions or a combination of urban and rural areas (8/39, 21%). Devices were implemented in three main settings: outpatient health clinics (12/39, 31%), hospitals (14/39, 36%), community outreach (10/39, 26%), or a combination of these settings (3/39, 8%). Mental and general health were the most common health domains assessed, with a single study assessing multiple health domains. Just under half of the devices tracked children’s health over time (16/39, 41%), and two-thirds (25/39, 64%) connected children or young people to clinical care. It was more common for information to be collected from a single informant (ie, the child or young person, trained health worker, clinician, and parent or caregiver) than from multiple informants. The health of children or young people was assessed as a primary or secondary outcome in 36% (14/39) of studies; however, only 3% (1/39) of studies assessed whether using the digital tool improved the health of users. Most papers reported early phase research (formative or process evaluations), with fewer outcome evaluations and only 3 randomized controlled trials. Identified challenges or risks were related to accessibility, clinical utility and safety, uptake, data quality, user interface or design aspects of the device, language proficiency or literacy, sociocultural barriers, and privacy or confidentiality concerns; ways to address these barriers were not thoroughly explored. Conclusions eHealth tools that assess and track health in children or young people have the potential to enhance health service delivery; however, a strong evidence base validating the clinical utility, efficacy, and safety of tools is lacking, and more thorough investigation is needed to address the risks and challenges of using these emerging technologies in clinical care. At present, there is greater potential for the tools to facilitate multi-informant, multidomain assessments and longitudinally track health over time and room for further implementation in rural or remote regions and community settings around the world.

show abstract

“…An Mhealth intervention can be used as a type of postoperative information and cooperation, medication notification (Li et al, 2019; and emergency information tool for family (Ehrler et al, 2017).…”

Section: Back Rou Ndmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, having a pain scale in mobile form is useful for family and health personnel (Sun et al., 2015 ). An Mhealth intervention can be used as a type of postoperative information and cooperation, medication notification (Li et al., 2019 ; Rantala, Pikkarainen, & Pölkki, 2020 ) and emergency information tool for family (Ehrler et al., 2017 ).…”

Section: Backroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

A gamified mobile health intervention for children in day surgery care: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To describe a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial which will evaluate the effectiveness of a gamified mobile health intervention for children in whole day surgery care.Design: A study protocol for a two-arm randomized controlled trial.Methods: Participants will be randomly assigned to the intervention group (N = 62), in which patients receive routine care and play a mobile game designed for children or the control group (N = 62), in which patients receive routine care, including a mobile phone application that supports parents during the care path. The primary outcome is children's pre-operative anxiety, while the secondary outcome measures included fear and postoperative pain, along with parental satisfaction and anxiety. Data collection started in August 2020. Results:The results of the ongoing randomized controlled trial will determine whether the developed gamified mobile health intervention can be recommended for hospital use, and whether it could be used to educate children about their surgical treatment to decrease anxiety.

show abstract

Monitoring of home recovery using the 317-nursing mobile application following day-case surgery in children

Cited by 9 publications

References 19 publications

Telemedicine in Surgical Care in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: A Scoping Review

Telemedicine in Surgical Care in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: A Scoping Review

eHealth Tools That Assess and Track Health and Well-being in Children and Young People: Systematic Review

A gamified mobile health intervention for children in day surgery care: Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About