Dataset Information

Effective German and English Language mHealth Apps for Self-management of Bronchial Asthma in Children and Adolescents: Comparison Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Mobile health (mHealth) apps hold great potential for asthma self-management. Data on the suitability of asthma apps intended for children are insufficient, and the availability of German language apps is still inadequate compared with English language apps.

Objective

This study aims to identify functional asthma apps for children in German and to compare them with English language apps. In line with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, the Google Play Store and Apple App Store are systematically searched to preselect the most efficient apps, which are then compared according to a self-compiled criteria catalog.

Methods

Both app stores were screened for the term asthma. Following a PRISMA preselection process, the apps that met the inclusion criteria (ie, available free of charge, German or English language, and suitable for children) were rated by 3 independent persons following a criteria catalog consisting of 9 categories, some conceived for this purpose (availability, child-friendly, learning factor, and range of functions) and some adopted from existing validated catalogs (functionality and design, ease of use, potential for improving asthma self-management, fun factor and incentives, and information management and medical accuracy). The highest rated apps in German and English were compared.

Results

A total of 403 apps were identified on the Google Play Store and the Apple App Store. Finally, 24 apps that met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. In the first step of the quality assessment, only 4 available German language asthma apps were compared with 20 English language asthma apps. The 4 German language apps were then compared with the 4 highest rated English language apps. All selected apps, independent of the language, were comparable in the following categories: availability, functionality and design, ease of use, and information management and medical accuracy. The English language apps scored significantly higher in the following categories: potential for improving self-management, child-friendly, fun factor, learning factor, and range of function. English language apps (mean total points 34.164, SD 1.09) performed significantly better than German language asthma apps (mean total points 22.91, SD 2.898; P=.003). The best rated English language app was Kiss my asthma (36/42 points), whereas the best rated German language app Kata achieved only 27.33 points.

Conclusions

The recommended English language apps are Kiss my asthma, AsthmaXcel, AsthmaAustralia, and Ask Me, AsthMe!, whereas the only recommended German language app is Kata. The use of apps plays an increasingly important role in patients' lives and in the medical field, making mHealth a staple in the future of asthma treatment plans. Although validated recommendations on rating mHealth apps have been published, it remains a challenging task for physicians and patients to choose a suitable app for each case, especially in non-English-speaking countries.

SUBMITTER: Franzmair J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8173395 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundNoncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading global health problem in this century and are the principal causes of death and health care spending worldwide. Mobile health (mHealth) apps can help manage and prevent NCDs if people are willing to use them as supportive tools. Still, many people are reluctant to adopt these technologies. Implementing new apps could result in earlier intervention for many health conditions, preventing more serious complications.ObjectiveThis research project aimed to test the factors that facilitate the adoption of mHealth apps by users with NCDs. We focused on determining, first, what user interface (UI) qualities and complexity levels appeal to users in evaluating mHealth apps. We also wanted to determine whether people prefer that the data collected by an mHealth app be analyzed using a physician or an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm. The contribution of this work is both theoretical and practical. We examined users' considerations when adopting mHealth apps that promote healthy lifestyles and helped them manage their NCDs. Our results can also help direct mHealth app UI designers to focus on the most appealing aspects of our findings.MethodsA total of 347 respondents volunteered to rate 3 models of mHealth apps based on 16 items that measured instrumentality, aesthetics, and symbolism. Respondents rated each model after reading 1 of 2 different scenarios. In one scenario, a physician analyzed the data, whereas, in the other, the data were analyzed by an AI algorithm. These scenarios tested the degree of trust people placed in AI algorithms versus the "human touch" of a human physician regarding analyzing data collected by an mHealth app.ResultsAs shown by the responses, the involvement of a human physician in the application had a significant effect (P<.001) on the perceived instrumentality of the simple model. The complex model with more controls was rated significantly more aesthetic when associated with a physician performing data analysis rather than an AI algorithm (P=.03).ConclusionsGenerally, when participants found a human touch in the mHealth app (connection to a human physician who they assumed would analyze their data), they judged the app more favorably. Simple models were evaluated more positively than complex ones, and aesthetics and symbolism were salient predictors of preference. These trends suggest that designers and developers of mHealth apps should keep the designs simple and pay special attention to aesthetics and symbolic value.

Project description:Background and objectivePain spans a broad spectrum of diseases and types that are highly prevalent and cause substantial disease burden for individuals and society. Up to 40% of people affected by pain receive no or inadequate treatment. Providing a scalable, time-, and location-independent way for pain diagnostic, management, prevention and treatment mobile health applications (MHA) might be a promising approach to improve health care for pain. However, the commercial app market is rapidly growing and unregulated, resulting in an opaque market. Studies investigating the content, privacy and security features, quality and scientific evidence of the available apps are highly needed, to guide patients and clinicians to high quality MHA.Contributing to this challenge, the present study investigates the content, quality, and privacy features of pain apps available in the European app stores.MethodsAn automated search engine was used to identify pain apps in the European Google Play and Apple App store. Pain apps were screened and checked for systematic criteria (pain-relatedness, functionality, availability, independent usability, English or German). Content, quality and privacy features were assessed by two independent reviewers using the German Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS-G). The MARS-G assesses quality on four objectives (engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information quality) and two subjective scales (perceived impact, subjective quality).ResultsOut of 1034 identified pain apps 218 were included. Pain apps covered eight different pain types. Content included basic information, advice, assessment and tracking, and stand-alone interventions. The overall quality of the pain apps was average M = 3.13 (SD = 0.56, min = 1, max = 4.69). The effectiveness of less than 1% of the included pain apps was evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. Major problems with data privacy were present: 59% provided no imprint, 70% had no visible privacy policy.ConclusionA multitude of pain apps is available. Most MHA lack scientific evaluation and have serious privacy issues, posing a potential threat to users. Further research on evidence and improvements privacy and security are needed. Overall, the potential of pain apps is not exploited.

Project description:BackgroundEffective disease self-management lowers asthma's burden of disease for both individual patients and health care systems. In principle, mobile health (mHealth) apps could enable effective asthma self-management interventions that improve a patient's quality of life while simultaneously reducing the overall treatment costs for health care systems. However, prior reviews in this field have found that mHealth apps for asthma lack clinical evaluation and are often not based on medical guidelines. Yet, beyond the missing evidence for clinical efficacy, little is known about the potential apps might have for improving asthma self-management.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the potential of publicly available and well-adopted mHealth apps for improving asthma self-management.MethodsThe Apple App store and Google Play store were systematically searched for asthma apps. In total, 523 apps were identified, of which 38 apps matched the selection criteria to be included in the review. Four requirements of app potential were investigated: app functions, potential to change behavior (by means of a behavior change technique taxonomy), potential to promote app use (by means of a gamification components taxonomy), and app quality (by means of the Mobile Application Rating Scale [MARS]).ResultsThe most commonly implemented functions in the 38 reviewed asthma apps were tracking (30/38, 79%) and information (26/38, 68%) functions, followed by assessment (20/38, 53%) and notification (18/38, 47%) functions. On average, the reviewed apps applied 7.12 of 26 available behavior change techniques (standard deviation [SD]=4.46) and 4.89 of 31 available gamification components (SD=4.21). Average app quality was acceptable (mean=3.17/5, SD=0.58), whereas subjective app quality lied between poor and acceptable (mean=2.65/5, SD=0.87). Additionally, the sum scores of all review frameworks were significantly correlated (lowest correlation: r36=.33, P=.04 between number of functions and gamification components; highest correlation: r36=.80, P<.001 between number of behavior change techniques and gamification components), which suggests that an app's potential tends to be consistent across review frameworks.ConclusionsSeveral apps were identified that performed consistently well across all applied review frameworks, thus indicating the potential mHealth apps offer for improving asthma self-management. However, many apps suffer from low quality. Therefore, app reviews should be considered as a decision support tool before deciding which app to integrate into a patient's asthma self-management. Furthermore, several research-practice gaps were identified that app developers should consider addressing in future asthma apps.

Project description:BackgroundAsthma is a chronic respiratory disorder that requires long-term pharmacotherapy and patient empowerment to manage the condition and recognize and respond to asthma exacerbations. Mobile health (mHealth) apps represent a potential medium through which patients can improve their ability to self-manage their asthma. Few studies have conducted a systematic evaluation of asthma mobile apps for quality and functionality using a validated tool. None of these reviews have systematically assessed these apps for their content and evaluated them against the available international best practice guidelines.ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to conduct a systematic search and evaluation of adult-targeted asthma mHealth apps. As part of this review, the potential of an mHealth app to improve asthma self-management and the overall quality of the app will be evaluated using the Mobile App Rating Scale framework, and the quality of the information within an app will be evaluated using the current Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines as a reference.MethodsA stepwise methodological approach was taken in creating this review. First, the most recent Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines were independently reviewed by 2 authors to identify key recommendations that could be feasibly incorporated into an mHealth app. A previously developed asthma assessment framework was identified and was modified to suit our research and ensure that all of these identified recommendations were included. In total, 2 popular app stores were reviewed to identify potential mHealth apps. These apps were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Suitable apps were then evaluated. Technical information was obtained from publicly available information. The next step was to perform an app quality assessment using the validated Mobile App Rating Scale framework to objectively determine the quality of an app. App functionality was assessed using the Intercontinental Medical Statistics Institute for Health Informatics Functionality Scoring System. Finally, the mHealth apps were assessed using our developed checklist.ResultsFunding has been received for the project from the Respiratory Department at Northern Health, Victoria. Three reviewers have been recruited to systematically evaluate the apps. The results of this study are expected in 2022.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this review represents the first study to examine all mHealth apps available in Australia that are targeted to adults with asthma for their functionality, quality, and consistency with international best practice guidelines. Although this review will only be conducted on mHealth apps available in Australia, many apps are available worldwide; thus, this study should be largely generalizable to other English-speaking regions and users. The results of this review will help to fill gaps in the literature and assist clinicians in providing evidence-based advice to patients wishing to use mHealth apps as part of their asthma self-management.Trial registrationPROSPERO 269894; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=269894.International registered report identifier (irrid)PRR1-10.2196/33103.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the past decade has witnessed the development of many self-management mobile health (mHealth) apps that enable users to monitor their health and activities independently, there is a general lack of empirical evidence on the functional and technical aspects of self-management mHealth apps from a software engineering perspective.ObjectiveThis study aims to systematically identify the characteristics and challenges of self-management mHealth apps, focusing on functionalities, design, development, and evaluation methods, as well as to specify the differences and similarities between published research papers and commercial and open-source apps.MethodsThis research was divided into 3 main phases to achieve the expected goal. The first phase involved reviewing peer-reviewed academic research papers from 7 digital libraries, and the second phase involved reviewing and evaluating apps available on Android and iOS app stores using the Mobile Application Rating Scale. Finally, the third phase involved analyzing and evaluating open-source apps from GitHub.ResultsIn total, 52 research papers, 42 app store apps, and 24 open-source apps were analyzed, synthesized, and reported. We found that the development of self-management mHealth apps requires significant time, effort, and cost because of their complexity and specific requirements, such as the use of machine learning algorithms, external services, and built-in technologies. In general, self-management mHealth apps are similar in their focus, user interface components, navigation and structure, services and technologies, authentication features, and architecture and patterns. However, they differ in terms of the use of machine learning, processing techniques, key functionalities, inference of machine learning knowledge, logging mechanisms, evaluation techniques, and challenges.ConclusionsSelf-management mHealth apps may offer an essential means of managing users' health, expecting to assist users in continuously monitoring their health and encourage them to adopt healthy habits. However, developing an efficient and intelligent self-management mHealth app with the ability to reduce resource consumption and processing time, as well as increase performance, is still under research and development. In addition, there is a need to find an automated process for evaluating and selecting suitable machine learning algorithms for the self-management of mHealth apps. We believe that these issues can be avoided or significantly reduced by using a model-driven engineering approach with a decision support system to accelerate and ameliorate the development process and quality of self-management mHealth apps.

Project description:BackgroundMobile health (mHealth) apps show vast potential in supporting patients and health care systems with the increasing prevalence and economic costs of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) worldwide. However, despite the availability of evidence-based mHealth apps, a substantial proportion of users do not adhere to them as intended and may consequently not receive treatment. Therefore, understanding the factors that act as barriers to or facilitators of adherence is a fundamental concern in preventing intervention dropouts and increasing the effectiveness of digital health interventions.ObjectiveThis review aimed to help stakeholders develop more effective digital health interventions by identifying factors influencing the continued use of mHealth apps targeting NCDs. We further derived quantified adherence scores for various health domains to validate the qualitative findings and explore adherence benchmarks.MethodsA comprehensive systematic literature search (January 2007 to December 2020) was conducted on MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and ACM Digital Library. Data on intended use, actual use, and factors influencing adherence were extracted. Intervention-related and patient-related factors with a positive or negative influence on adherence are presented separately for the health domains of NCD self-management, mental health, substance use, nutrition, physical activity, weight loss, multicomponent lifestyle interventions, mindfulness, and other NCDs. Quantified adherence measures, calculated as the ratio between the estimated intended use and actual use, were derived for each study and compared with the qualitative findings.ResultsThe literature search yielded 2862 potentially relevant articles, of which 99 (3.46%) were included as part of the inclusion criteria. A total of 4 intervention-related factors indicated positive effects on adherence across all health domains: personalization or tailoring of the content of mHealth apps to the individual needs of the user, reminders in the form of individualized push notifications, user-friendly and technically stable app design, and personal support complementary to the digital intervention. Social and gamification features were also identified as drivers of app adherence across several health domains. A wide variety of patient-related factors such as user characteristics or recruitment channels further affects adherence. The derived adherence scores of the included mHealth apps averaged 56.0% (SD 24.4%).ConclusionsThis study contributes to the scarce scientific evidence on factors that positively or negatively influence adherence to mHealth apps and is the first to quantitatively compare adherence relative to the intended use of various health domains. As underlying studies mostly have a pilot character with short study durations, research on factors influencing adherence to mHealth apps is still limited. To facilitate future research on mHealth app adherence, researchers should clearly outline and justify the app's intended use; report objective data on actual use relative to the intended use; and, ideally, provide long-term use and retention data.