Validity and efficiency of a smartphone-based electronic data collection tool for operative data in rotator cuff repair

Sahoo, Sambit; Mohr, Jill; Strnad, Greg; Vega, José F.; Jones, Morgan H.; Schickendantz, Mark S.; Farrow, Lutul D.; Spindler, Kurt P.; Iannotti, Joseph P.; Ricchetti, Eric T.; Derwin, Kathleen A.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2018.12.009

Cited by 15 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Data on 20 of the 24 preoperative patient and disease-specific factors were obtained from the Cleveland Clinic's OME database, 5 which is approved by Cleveland Clinic's institutional review board (#06-196) and has been shown to be a valid and efficient tool for collecting comprehensive and standardized data on RCR. 26 Data on 4 factors (comorbidities, preoperative opioid use, chronic pain, and workers' compensation status) were obtained from the Cleveland Clinic's electronic medical record (EMR) (Epic Systems), Perioperative Health Documentation System database, and Epic Cost of Goods Sold system. The CCI was calculated from the comorbidity data.…”

Section: Data Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

Associations of Preoperative Patient Mental Health and Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics With Baseline Pain, Function, and Satisfaction in Patients Undergoing Rotator Cuff Repairs

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Shoulder pain and dysfunction are common indications for rotator cuff repair surgery, yet the factors that are associated with these symptoms are not fully understood. Purpose/Hypothesis: This study aimed to investigate the associations of patient and disease-specific factors with baseline patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair. We hypothesized that tear size and mental health status, as assessed by the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey mental component score (VR-12 MCS), would be associated with baseline total Penn Shoulder Score (PSS) and its pain, function, and satisfaction subscale scores. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We prospectively identified 12 patient factors and 12 disease-specific factors as possible statistical predictors for baseline PROMs in patients undergoing surgical repair of superior-posterior rotator cuff tears at a single institution over a 3-year period. Multivariable statistical modeling and Akaike information criterion comparisons were used to investigate the unique associations with, and relative importance of, these factors in accounting for variation in baseline PSS and its subscale scores. Results: A total of 1442 patients who had undergone surgery by 23 surgeons met inclusion criteria, with a baseline median total PSS of 38.5 (pain, 12; function, 24.2; satisfaction, 2). Adjusted R2 in multivariable models demonstrated that the 24 general patient and disease-specific factors accounted for 22% to 24% of the variability in total PSS and its pain and function subscale scores. Large/massive tear size was significantly associated with worse PSS total score and function score but not pain or satisfaction scores. Lower VR-12 MCS was significantly associated with worse total PSS and all 3 subscale scores. Among other factors significantly associated with baseline PROMs were sex, race, preoperative opioid use, years of education, employment status, acromion status, and adhesive capsulitis. Lower VR-12 MCS, preoperative opioid use, female sex, and black race were the factors most strongly associated with baseline PROMs. Conclusion: Large/massive tear size, lower VR-12 MCS, and several additional patient and disease-specific factors are associated with baseline PROMs in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair. Further studies are needed to investigate whether these factors will also predict poor postoperative PROMs.

show abstract

Section: Data Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

Associations of Preoperative Patient Mental Health and Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics With Baseline Pain, Function, and Satisfaction in Patients Undergoing Rotator Cuff Repairs

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Irrespective of the rapid developments in the field of medical apps, young physicians especially have experienced a fundamental change in their information behavior over the past few years [16]. An increasing number of studies have focused on the benefits and consequences of smartphone use in the fields of orthopedics and trauma surgery [17][18][19][20][21][22]. Today, the majority of American orthopedic surgeons use smartphones and a wide variety of apps in their daily clinical work [23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smartphone and App Usage in Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery: Survey Study of Physicians Regarding Acceptance, Risks, and Future Prospects in Germany

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In the course of digitization, smartphones are affecting an increasing number of areas of users’ lives, giving them almost ubiquitous access to the internet and other web applications. Mobile health (mHealth) has become an integral part of some areas of patient care. In contrast to other disciplines, routine integration of mobile devices in orthopedics and trauma surgery in Germany is still in its infancy. Objective This study aimed to investigate physicians’ current state of opinion regarding acceptance, future prospects, and risks of medical apps in the field of orthopedics and trauma surgery in Germany. Methods A web-based survey among orthopedics and trauma surgeons in German university hospitals on the use of medical apps in everyday clinical practice was conducted between September 2018 and February 2019. The survey consisted of 13 open- and closed-ended or multiple-choice questions. A logistic regression analysis was performed to ascertain the effects of interindividual characteristics on the likelihood of participants’ app and smartphone usage behavior. Results A total of 206 physicians participated in the survey. All of the participants (206/206, 100%) owned a smartphone, and 79.1% (159/201) used the device, while 64.7% (130/201) used apps regularly in everyday clinical practice. Medical apps were perceived as beneficial, given their substantial future promise, by 90.1% (181/201) of the participants. However, 62.5% (120/192) of the participants were not satisfied with the current supply of medical apps in app stores. Desired specifications for future apps were “intuitive usability” (167/201, 83.1%), “no advertising” (145/201, 72.1%), and “free apps” (92/201, 45.8%). The attributes “transparent app development and app sponsoring” (75/201, 37.3%) and the existence of an “easy-to-understand privacy statement” (50/201, 24.9%) were of minor relevance. The majority of the participants (162/194, 83.5%) considered that future apps in the field of “medical research” would provide the greatest benefit. The greatest predicted risks were “data misuse” (147/189, 77.8%), “usage of untrustworthy apps” (135/189, 71.4%), and “alienation from patients” (51/189, 27.0%). Increasing age was significantly associated with a reduction in the likelihood of regular smartphone (odds ratio [OR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.97; P=.002) and app (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85-0.96; P=.001) usage, while the medical profession grade had no significant impact on the usage behavior. Conclusions The study demonstrates that young German doctors in orthopedics and trauma surgery already use smartphones and apps in everyday clinical practice. Medical apps are considered to play an important role in the future. However, a significant discrepancy exists between the supply and demand of mHealth applications, which creates a legal and ethical vacuum with regard to data protection.

show abstract

“…Irrespective of rapid developments in the field of medical apps, the information behavior of young physicians has fundamentally changed in recent years [13]. Numerous studies have focused on the potential benefits and consequences of smartphone usage in the fields of orthopedic surgery as a result of the rapidly growing mobile health (mHealth) implementation [14][15][16][17][18]. Currently, there are some app store-based screening reviews of commercially available apps that have been developed to address daily clinical issues in orthopedics [19,20].…”

Section: Mobile Health In Orthopedic Surgeons Clinical Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Secure Apps for Daily Clinical Use by German Orthopedic Surgeons: Searching for the "Needle in a Haystack"

Dittrich¹,

Beck²,

Harren³

et al. 2020

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background It is undeniable that appropriate smartphone apps offer enormous opportunities for dealing with future challenges in orthopedic surgery and public health, in general. However, it is still unclear how the apps currently available in the two major app stores can be used in daily clinical routine by German orthopedic surgeons. Objective This study aimed to gain evidence regarding the quantity and quality of apps available in the two major app stores and their suitability for use by orthopedic surgeons in Germany. Methods We conducted a systematic, keyword-based app store screening to obtain evidence concerning the quantity and quality of commercially available apps. Apps that met the inclusion criteria were evaluated using the app synopsis–checklist for users and the German Mobile App Rating Scale for secure use, trustworthiness, and quality. Results The investigation revealed serious shortcomings regarding legal and medical aspects. Furthermore, most apps turned out to be useless and unsuitable for the clinical field of application (4242/4249, 99.84%). Finally, 7 trustworthy and high-quality apps (7/4249, 0.16%) offering secure usage in the daily clinical routine of orthopedists were identified. These apps mainly focused on education (5/7). None of them were CE (Conformité Européenne) certified. Moreover, there are no studies providing evidence that these apps have any positive use whatsoever. Conclusions The data obtained in our study suggest that the number of trustworthy and high-quality apps on offer is extremely low. Nowadays, finding appropriate apps in the fast-moving, complex, dynamic, and rudimentarily controlled app stores is most challenging. Promising approaches, for example, systematic app store screenings, app-rating developments, reviews or app libraries, and the creation of consistent standards have been established. However, further efforts are necessary to ensure that these innovative mobile health apps not only provide the correct information but are also safe to use in daily clinical practice.

show abstract

Validity and efficiency of a smartphone-based electronic data collection tool for operative data in rotator cuff repair

Cited by 15 publications

References 26 publications

Associations of Preoperative Patient Mental Health and Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics With Baseline Pain, Function, and Satisfaction in Patients Undergoing Rotator Cuff Repairs

Associations of Preoperative Patient Mental Health and Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics With Baseline Pain, Function, and Satisfaction in Patients Undergoing Rotator Cuff Repairs

Smartphone and App Usage in Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery: Survey Study of Physicians Regarding Acceptance, Risks, and Future Prospects in Germany

Analysis of Secure Apps for Daily Clinical Use by German Orthopedic Surgeons: Searching for the "Needle in a Haystack"

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About