Dataset Information

Smartphone Apps for Managing Antithrombotic Therapy: Scoping Literature Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Antithrombotic therapy is complex and requires informed decisions and high therapy adherence. Several mobile phone apps exist to either support physicians in the management of antithrombotic therapies or to educate and support patients. For the majority of these apps, both their medical evidence and their development background are unknown.

Objective

This review aims to investigate the available literature describing high-quality apps for managing antithrombotic therapy based on professional scientific information.

Methods

Keywords and Medical Subject Heading terms were used to search MEDLINE via PubMed and Ovid between December 2019 and January 2022. Inclusion criteria were the availability of full text and publications in the English language. Apps that solely focused on atrial fibrillation were excluded. Qualitative findings were thematically synthesized and reported narratively.

Results

Out of 149 identified records, 32 were classified as eligible. We identified four groups: (1) apps for patients supporting self-management of vitamin K antagonists, (2) apps for patients increasing therapy adherence, (3) educational apps for patients, and (4) apps for physicians in supporting guideline adherence.

Conclusions

Throughout the evaluated data, patients from all age groups receiving antithrombotic drugs expressed the desire for a digital tool that could support their therapy management. In addition, physicians using mobile guideline-based apps may have contributed to decreased adverse event rates among their patients. In general, digital apps encompassing both user-friendly designs and scientific backgrounds may enhance the safety of antithrombotic therapies. However, our evaluation did not identify any apps that addressed all antithrombotic drugs in combination with perioperative stratification strategies. Currently, strict regulations for smartphone apps seem to negatively affect the development of new apps. Therefore, new legal policies for medical digital apps are urgently needed.

SUBMITTER: Praus F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9257616 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMental health apps (MHAs) provide opportunities for accessible, immediate, and innovative approaches to better understand and support the treatment of mental health disorders, especially those with a high burden, such as bipolar disorder (BD). Many MHAs have been developed, but few have had their effectiveness evaluated.ObjectiveThis systematic scoping review explores current process and outcome measures of MHAs for BD with the aim to provide a comprehensive overview of current research. This will identify the best practice for evaluating MHAs for BD and inform future studies.MethodsA systematic literature search of the health science databases PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, EBSCO, Scopus, and Web of Science was undertaken up to January 2021 (with no start date) to narratively assess how studies had evaluated MHAs for BD.ResultsOf 4051 original search results, 12 articles were included. These 12 studies included 435 participants, and of these, 343 had BD type I or II. Moreover, 11 of the 12 studies provided the ages (mean 37 years) of the participants. One study did not report age data. The male to female ratio of the 343 participants was 137:206. The most widely employed validated outcome measure was the Young Mania Rating Scale, being used 8 times. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17/Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was used thrice; the Altman Self-Rating Mania Scale, Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, and Functional Assessment Staging Test were used twice; and the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations, EuroQoL 5-Dimension Health Questionnaire, Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7, Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Mindfulness Attention Awareness Scale, Major Depression Index, Morisky-Green 8-item, Perceived Stress Scale, and World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF were used once. Self-report measures were captured in 9 different studies, 6 of which used MONARCA. Mood and energy levels were the most commonly used self-report measures, being used 4 times each. Furthermore, 11 of the 12 studies discussed the various confounding factors and barriers to the use of MHAs for BD.ConclusionsReported low adherence rates, usability challenges, and privacy concerns act as barriers to the use of MHAs for BD. Moreover, as MHA evaluation is itself developing, guidance for clinicians in how to aid patient choices in mobile health needs to develop. These obstacles could be ameliorated by incorporating co-production and co-design using participatory patient approaches during the development and evaluation stages of MHAs for BD. Further, including qualitative aspects in trials that examine patient experience of both mental ill health and the MHA itself could result in a more patient-friendly fit-for-purpose MHA for BD.

Project description:BackgroundSmartphone apps can aid consumers in making healthier and more sustainable food purchases. However, there is still a limited understanding of the different app design approaches and their impact on food purchase choices. An overview of existing food purchase choice apps and an understanding of common challenges can help speed up effective future developments.ObjectiveWe examined the academic literature on food purchase choice apps and provided an overview of the design characteristics, opportunities, and challenges for effective implementation. Thus, we contribute to an understanding of how technologies can effectively improve food purchase choice behavior and provide recommendations for future design efforts.MethodsFollowing the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, we considered peer-reviewed literature on food purchase choice apps within IEEE Xplore, PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. We inductively coded and summarized design characteristics. Opportunities and challenges were addressed from both quantitative and qualitative perspectives. From the quantitative perspective, we coded and summarized outcomes of comparative evaluation trials. From the qualitative perspective, we performed a qualitative content analysis of commonly discussed opportunities and challenges.ResultsWe retrieved 55 articles, identified 46 unique apps, and grouped them into 5 distinct app types. Each app type supports a specific purchase choice stage and shares a common functional design. Most apps support the product selection stage (selection apps; 27/46, 59%), commonly by scanning the barcode and displaying a nutritional rating. In total, 73% (8/11) of the evaluation trials reported significant findings and indicated the potential of food purchase choice apps to support behavior change. However, relatively few evaluations covered the selection app type, and these studies showed mixed results. We found a common opportunity in apps contributing to learning (knowledge gain), whereas infrequent engagement presents a common challenge. The latter was associated with perceived burden of use, trust, and performance as well as with learning. In addition, there were technical challenges in establishing comprehensive product information databases or achieving performance accuracy with advanced identification methods such as image recognition.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that designs of food purchase choice apps do not encourage repeated use or long-term adoption, compromising the effectiveness of behavior change through nudging. However, we found that smartphone apps can enhance learning, which plays an important role in behavior change. Compared with nudging as a mechanism for behavior change, this mechanism is less dependent on continued use. We argue that designs that optimize for learning within each interaction have a better chance of achieving behavior change. This review concludes with design recommendations, suggesting that food purchase choice app designers anticipate the possibility of early abandonment as part of their design process and design apps that optimize the learning experience.

Project description:Background: Breast cancer rates have been increasing worldwide, particularly among young women, suggesting important interactions between genes and health behaviors. At the same time, mobile technology, including smartphones applications (apps), has emerged as a new tool for delivering healthcare and health-related services. As of 2018, there were nearly 600 publicly available breast cancer apps designed to provide disease and treatment information, to manage disease, and to raise overall awareness. However, the extent to which apps are incorporated into breast cancer prevention research is unknown. Therefore, the objective of this review was to determine how mobile applications are being used for breast cancer prevention among women across the cancer control continuum. Methods: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection databases using the keywords breast cancer, smartphone, mobile application, and phone app. Full-length journal articles available in English that addressed the research question were included. We categorized articles by prevention type (primary, secondary, and tertiary) and phase of research (protocol, development, feasibility, pilot, measurement, and effectiveness), and identified common themes and gaps. Results: Our search yielded 82 studies (69 unique) that used apps in breast cancer prevention research across 20 countries. Approximately half of the named apps were publicly available. The majority (73%) of studies targeted tertiary prevention; 15% targeted secondary and 13% targeted primary prevention. Apps were used across all phases of research with the predominant phase being feasibility in tertiary prevention (34%), effectiveness in secondary prevention (63%), and development (30%) and effectiveness (30%) in primary prevention. Common uses included assessing outcomes relevant to clinical care coordination, quality of life, increasing self-efficacy and screening behaviors, and tracking and managing health behaviors. Conclusions: We identified the following gaps: few effectiveness studies in tertiary prevention, minimal use of apps for breast cancer etiology or early detection, and few interventions in those at average risk of breast cancer. These findings suggest that while mobile apps can inform breast cancer prevention across the continuum, more work is needed to incorporate apps into primary prevention.

Project description:BackgroundCancer is increasingly being treated as a chronic disease rather than an acute one-time illness. Additionally, oral anticancer therapies, as opposed to intravenous chemotherapy, are now available for an increasing number of cancer indications. Mobile health (mHealth) apps for use on mobile devices (eg, smartphones or tablets) are designed to help patients with medication adherence, symptom tracking, and disease management. Several previous literature reviews have been conducted regarding mHealth apps for cancer. However, these studies did not address patient preferences for the features of cancer mHealth apps.ObjectiveThe primary aim was to review the scientific literature that describes the features and functions of mHealth apps designed for cancer self-management.MethodsAs the purpose of this review was to explore the depth and breadth of research on mHealth app features for cancer self-management, a scoping review methodology was adopted. Four databases were used for this review: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Citation and reference searches were conducted for manuscripts meeting the inclusion criteria. A gray literature search was also conducted. Data extracted from manuscripts included author, title, publication date, study type, sampling type, cancer type, treatment, age of participants, features, availability (free or subscription), design input, and patient preferences. Finally, the features listed for each app were compared, highlighting similarities across platforms as well as features unique to each app.ResultsAfter the removal of duplicates, 522 manuscripts remained for the title and abstract review, with 51 undergoing full-text review. A total of 7 manuscripts (referred to as studies hereafter) were included in the final scoping review. App features described in each study varied from 2 to 11, with a median of 4 features per app. The most reported feature was a symptom or side effect tracker, which was reported in 6 studies. Two apps specified the inclusion of patients and health care providers during the design, while 1 app noted that IT and communications experts provided design input. The utility of the apps for end users was measured in several ways, including acceptability (measuring the end users' experience), usability (assessing the functionality and performance by observing real users completing tasks), or qualitative data (reports from end users collected from interviews or focus groups).ConclusionsThis review explored the literature on cancer mHealth apps. Popular features within these mHealth apps include symptom trackers, cancer education, and medication trackers. However, these apps and features are often developed with little input from patients. Additionally, there is little information regarding patient preferences for the features of existing apps. While the number of cancer-related apps available for download continues to increase, further exploration of patient preferences for app features could result in apps that better meet patient disease self-management needs.

Project description:BackgroundDiabetes is one of the leading noncommunicable chronic diseases globally. In people with diabetes, blood glucose levels need to be monitored regularly and managed adequately through healthy lifestyles and medications. However, various factors contribute to poor medication adherence. Smartphone apps can improve medication adherence in people with diabetes, but it is not clear which app features are most beneficial.ObjectiveThis study aims to systematically review and evaluate high-quality apps for diabetes medication adherence, which are freely available to the public in Android and Apple app stores and present the technical features of the apps.MethodsWe systematically searched Apple App Store and Google Play for apps that assist in diabetes medication adherence, using predefined selection criteria. We assessed apps using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and calculated the mean app-specific score (MASS) by taking the average of app-specific scores on 6 dimensions, namely, awareness, knowledge, attitudes, intention to change, help-seeking, and behavior change rated on a 5-point scale (1=strongly disagree and 5=strongly agree). We used the mean of the app's performance on these 6 dimensions to calculate the MASS. Apps that achieved a total MASS mean quality score greater than 4 out of 5 were considered to be of high quality in our study. We formulated a task-technology fit matrix to evaluate the apps for diabetes medication adherence.ResultsWe identified 8 high-quality apps (MASS score≥4) and presented the findings under 3 main categories: characteristics of the included apps, app features, and diabetes medication adherence. Our framework to evaluate smartphone apps in promoting diabetes medication adherence considered physiological factors influencing diabetes and app features. On evaluation, we observed that 25% of the apps promoted high adherence and another 25% of the apps promoted moderate adherence. Finally, we found that 50% of the apps provided low adherence to diabetes medication.ConclusionsOur findings show that almost half of the high-quality apps publicly available for free did not achieve high to moderate medication adherence. Our framework could have positive implications for the future design and development of apps for patients with diabetes. Additionally, apps need to be evaluated using a standardized framework, and only those promoting higher medication adherence should be prescribed for better health outcomes.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Smartphone apps are an increasingly popular means for delivering psychological interventions to patients suffering from a mental disorder. In line with this popularity, there is a need to analyze and summarize the state of the art, both from a psychological and technical perspective. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the use of smartphones for psychological interventions. Our systematic review has the following objectives: (1) analyze the coverage of mental disorders in research articles per year; (2) study the types of assessment in research articles per mental disorder per year; (3) map the use of advanced technical features, such as sensors, and novel software features, such as personalization and social media, per mental disorder; (4) provide an overview of smartphone apps per mental disorder; and (5) provide an overview of the key characteristics of empirical assessments with rigorous designs (ie, randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). METHODS:The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews were followed. We performed searches in Scopus, Web of Science, American Psychological Association PsycNET, and Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, covering a period of 6 years (2013-2018). We included papers that described the use of smartphone apps to deliver psychological interventions for known mental disorders. We formed multidisciplinary teams, comprising experts in psychology and computer science, to select and classify articles based on psychological and technical features. RESULTS:We found 158 articles that met the inclusion criteria. We observed an increasing interest in smartphone-based interventions over time. Most research targeted disorders with high prevalence, that is, depressive (31/158,19.6%) and anxiety disorders (18/158, 11.4%). Of the total, 72.7% (115/158) of the papers focused on six mental disorders: depression, anxiety, trauma and stressor-related, substance-related and addiction, schizophrenia spectrum, and other psychotic disorders, or a combination of disorders. More than half of known mental disorders were not or very scarcely (<3%) represented. An increasing number of studies were dedicated to assessing clinical effects, but RCTs were still a minority (25/158, 15.8%). From a technical viewpoint, interventions were leveraging the improved modalities (screen and sound) and interactivity of smartphones but only sparingly leveraged their truly novel capabilities, such as sensors, alternative delivery paradigms, and analytical methods. CONCLUSIONS:There is a need for designing interventions for the full breadth of mental disorders, rather than primarily focusing on most prevalent disorders. We further contend that an increasingly systematic focus, that is, involving RCTs, is needed to improve the robustness and trustworthiness of assessments. Regarding technical aspects, we argue that further exploration and innovative use of the novel capabilities of smartphones are needed to fully realize their potential for the treatment of mental health disorders.