Constructing an assessment framework for the quality of asthma smartphone applications

Developing a Comprehensive List of Criteria to Evaluate the Characteristics and Quality of eHealth Smartphone Apps: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The field of eHealth is growing rapidly and chaotically. Health care professionals need guidance on reviewing and assessing health-related smartphone apps to propose appropriate ones to their patients. However, to date, no framework or evaluation tool fulfills this purpose.

OBJECTIVE

Before developing a tool to help health care professionals assess and recommend apps to their patients, we aimed to create an overview of published criteria to describe and evaluate health apps.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to identify existing criteria for eHealth smartphone app evaluation. Relevant databases and trial registers were queried for articles. Articles were included that (1) described tools, guidelines, dimensions, or criteria to evaluate apps, (2) were available in full text, and (3) were written in English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, or Spanish. We proposed a conceptual framework for app evaluation based on the dimensions reported in the selected articles. This was revised iteratively in discussion rounds with international stakeholders. The conceptual framework was used to synthesize the reported evaluation criteria. The list of criteria was discussed and refined by the research team.

RESULTS

Screening of 1258 articles yielded 128 (10.17%) that met the inclusion criteria. Of these 128 articles, 30 (23.4%) reported the use of self-developed criteria and described their development processes incompletely. Although 43 evaluation instruments were used only once, 6 were used in multiple studies. Most articles (83/128, 64.8%) did not report following theoretical guidelines; those that did noted 37 theoretical frameworks. On the basis of the selected articles, we proposed a conceptual framework to explore 6 app evaluation dimensions: context, stakeholder involvement, features and requirements, development processes, implementation, and evaluation. After standardizing the definitions, we identified 205 distinct criteria. Through consensus, the research team relabeled 12 of these and added 11 more-mainly related to ethical, legal, and social aspects-resulting in 216 evaluation criteria. No criteria had to be moved between dimensions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a comprehensive overview of criteria currently used in clinical practice to describe and evaluate apps. This is necessary as no reviewed criteria sets were inclusive, and none included consistent definitions and terminology. Although the resulting overview is impractical for use in clinical practice in its current form, it confirms the need to craft it into a purpose-built, theory-driven tool. Therefore, in a subsequent step, based on our current criteria set, we plan to construct an app evaluation tool with 2 parts: a short section (including 1-3 questions/dimension) to quickly disqualify clearly unsuitable apps and a longer one to investigate more likely candidates in closer detail. We will use a Delphi consensus-building process and develop a user manual to prepare for this undertaking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021227064; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021227064.

Impact of the implementation of a telemedicine program on patients diagnosed with asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is one of the most common respiratory ailments worldwide. Despite broad understanding of the illness and of the available therapeutic options for it, patients with serious asthma suffer poor monitoring of their illness in 50% of cases.

AIM

To assess the impact of the implementation of a mobile application (ESTOI) to control asthma in patients diagnosed with the illness, their adherence to treatment, and their perceived quality of life.

METHODOLOGY

Randomized clinical trial with 52 weeks' follow-up of patients with asthma seen in a specialized hospital for their treatment in Spain. Some 108 included patients will be divided into two groups. The intervention group will undergo more exhaustive follow-up than normal, including access to the ESTOI application, which will have various categories of attention: control of symptoms, health recommendations, current treatment and personalized action plan, PEF record, nutritional plan, and chat access with a medical team. The asthma control questionnaire ACT is the main assessment variable. Other variables to be studied include an adherence test for the use of inhalers (TAI), the number of exacerbations, maximum exhalation flow, exhaled nitric oxide test, hospital anxiety and depression scale, asthma quality-of-life questionnaire, forced spirometry parameters (FVC, FEV1, and PBD), and analytic parameters (eosinophilia and IGE). The data will be collected during outpatient visits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial has registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT06116292).

Functionality and Quality of Asthma mHealth Apps and Their Consistency With International Guidelines: Structured Search and Evaluation

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic respiratory disorder requiring long-term pharmacotherapy and judicious patient self-management. Few studies have systematically evaluated asthma mobile health (mHealth) apps for quality and functionality; however, none have systematically assessed these apps for their content alignment with international best practice guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to conduct a systematic search and evaluation of current mHealth apps in the Australian marketplace for their functionality, quality, and consistency with best practice guidelines.

METHODS

The most recent Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines were reviewed to identify key recommendations that could be feasibly incorporated into an mHealth app. We developed a checklist based on these recommendations and a modified version of a previously developed framework. App stores were reviewed to identify potential mHealth apps based on predefined criteria. Evaluation of suitable apps included the assessment of technical information, an app quality assessment using the validated Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) framework, and an app functionality assessment using the Intercontinental Medical Statistics Institute for Health Informatics (IMS) Functionality Scoring System. Finally, the mHealth apps were assessed for their content alignment with the GINA guidelines using the checklist we developed.

RESULTS

Of the 422 apps initially identified, 53 were suitable for further analysis based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The mean number of behavioral change techniques for a single app was 3.26 (SD 2.27). The mean MARS score for all the reviewed apps was 3.05 (SD 0.54). Of 53 apps, 27 (51%) achieved a total MARS score of ≥3. On average, the reviewed apps achieved 5.1 (SD 2.79) functionalities on the 11-point IMS functionality scale. The median number of functionalities identified was 5 (IQR 2-7). Overall, 10 (22%) of the 45 apps with reviewer consensus in this domain provided general knowledge regarding asthma. Of 53 apps, skill training in peak flow meters, inhaler devices, recognizing or responding to exacerbations, and nonpharmacological asthma management were identified in 8 (17%), 12 (25%), 11 (28%), and 14 (31%) apps, respectively; 19 (37%) apps could track or record "asthma symptoms," which was the most commonly recorded metric. The most frequently identified prompt was for taking preventive medications, available in 9 (20%) apps. Five (10%) apps provided an area for patients to store or enter their asthma action plan.

CONCLUSIONS

This study used a unique checklist developed based on the GINA guidelines to evaluate the content alignment of asthma apps. Good-quality asthma apps aligned with international best practice asthma guidelines are lacking. Future app development should target the currently lacking key features identified in this study, including the use of asthma action plans and the deployment of behavioral change techniques to engage and re-engage with users. This study has implications for clinicians navigating the ever-expanding mHealth app market for chronic diseases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021269894; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=269894.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/33103.

Developing an Exercise Attitudes and Behavior Intentions Questionnaire for Survivors of Aortic Dissection: An Exploratory Factor Analysis

Purpose

Our study aimed to develop a questionnaire to assess the reliability and validity of exercise attitudes and behavior intentions among survivors of an aortic dissection (AD).

Methods

There were two phases to the study between April 2021 and April 2022. Phase I involved the development of an initial version of the Exercise Attitudes and Behavior Intentions Questionnaire (EABIQ) through literature reviews, qualitative interviews, Delphi expert consultations and a pre-experimental study. During Phase II, the reliability and validity of the questionnaire was assessed in 160 survivors with AD.

Results

A 62-item EABIQ for AD survivors was developed. Eleven common components with eigenvalues larger than 1 were identified by exploratory factor analysis. The scale's variance explained cumulatively rate was 75.216%. The content validity index at the item level for the EABIQ varied from 0.813 to 1.000 and the S-CVI/Ave was 0.934. The correlation coefficients between each scale dimension and the overall scale ranged from 0.405 to 0.785, with all p-values less than 0.05. Cronbach's alpha for the whole scale was 0.929, with Cronbach's alpha for each domain ranging from 0.835 to 0.965. The overall scale split-half reliability coefficient was 0.960, with each domain's split-half reliability coefficient ranging from 0.844 to 0.962.

Conclusions

The AD exercise attitudes and behavior intentions questionnaire has high reliability and validity and is generally consistent with the hypothetical theoretical framework. It can be used as a judgment tool to measure the exercise behavior for AD patients.

Functionality and Quality of Asthma mHealth Apps and Their Consistency With International Guidelines: Protocol for a Systematic Search and Evaluation of Mobile Apps

Background

Asthma 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.

Objective

The 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.

Methods

A 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.

Results

Funding 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.

Conclusions

To 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 Registration

PROSPERO 269894; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=269894

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/33103

Identification and Evaluation of Methodologies to Assess the Quality of Mobile Health Apps in High-, Low-, and Middle-Income Countries: Rapid Review

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been rapid growth in the availability and use of mobile health (mHealth) apps around the world. A consensus regarding an accepted standard to assess the quality of such apps has yet to be reached. A factor that exacerbates the challenge of mHealth app quality assessment is variations in the interpretation of quality and its subdimensions. Consequently, it has become increasingly difficult for health care professionals worldwide to distinguish apps of high quality from those of lower quality. This exposes both patients and health care professionals to unnecessary risks. Despite progress, limited understanding of the contributions of researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) exists on this topic. Furthermore, the applicability of quality assessment methodologies in LMIC settings remains relatively unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

This rapid review aims to identify current methodologies in the literature to assess the quality of mHealth apps, understand what aspects of quality these methodologies address, determine what input has been made by authors from LMICs, and examine the applicability of such methodologies in LMICs.

METHODS

This review was registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews). A search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus was performed for papers related to mHealth app quality assessment methodologies, which were published in English between 2005 and 2020. By taking a rapid review approach, a thematic and descriptive analysis of the papers was performed.

RESULTS

Electronic database searches identified 841 papers. After the screening process, 52 papers remained for inclusion. Of the 52 papers, 5 (10%) proposed novel methodologies that could be used to evaluate mHealth apps of diverse medical areas of interest, 8 (15%) proposed methodologies that could be used to assess apps concerned with a specific medical focus, and 39 (75%) used methodologies developed by other published authors to evaluate the quality of various groups of mHealth apps. The authors in 6% (3/52) of papers were solely affiliated to institutes in LMICs. A further 15% (8/52) of papers had at least one coauthor affiliated to an institute in an LMIC.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality assessment of mHealth apps is complex in nature and at times subjective. Despite growing research on this topic, to date, an all-encompassing appropriate means for evaluating the quality of mHealth apps does not exist. There has been engagement with authors affiliated to institutes across LMICs; however, limited consideration of current generic methodologies for application in LMIC settings has been identified.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020205149; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=205149.

Isn't There an App for That? The Role of Smartphone and Tablet Applications for Asthma Education and Self-Management in Adolescents

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases worldwide, with a substantial proportion of the asthma population being children and adolescents. Self-management is recognized as a key component to asthma management, with multiple international guidelines emphasizing the need for adequate self-management skills for good asthma control. Unfortunately, the uptake amongst young people and adolescents is low, with often suboptimal engagement to self-management education and skills contributing to poor adherence to medication as well as poor perception of asthma symptoms. Innovative solutions to deliver education and self-management to adolescents are clearly needed. mHealth is the use of mobile devices such as smartphones and tablet devices to improve healthcare and has been used in multiple chronic diseases. This review articles explores the current use of mHealth in asthma, specifically smartphone and tablet applications as a generation-appropriate, accessible delivery modality for provision of asthma education and self-management interventions in adolescents. Current evidence gaps are also highlighted, which should be addressed in future research.

New Concepts and Technological Resources in Patient Education and Asthma Self-Management

Asthma is a chronic disease that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In general, the use of technology resources or electronic health (e-health) has been shown to have beneficial effects on patients with asthma. E-health can impact a broad section of patients and can be cost-effective and associated with high patient satisfaction. E-health may enable remote delivery of care, as well as timely access to health care, which are some of the common challenges faced by patients with asthma. Web-based asthma self-management systems have been found to improve quality of life, self-reported asthma symptoms, lung function, reduction in asthma symptoms/exacerbations, and self-reported adherence for adults. Social media is commonly being used as a platform to disseminate information on asthma to increase public awareness. It can facilitate asthma self-management in a patient friendly manner and has shown to improve asthma control test scores as well as self-esteem. Text massages reminders can increase awareness regarding asthma treatment and control, thus potentially can improve adherence to medications and asthma outcome. Mobile health applications can support asthma self-management, improve a patient's quality of life, promote medication adherence, and potentially reduce the overall costs for asthma care. Inhaler trackers have shown to be beneficial to asthma outcome in various populations by improving adherence to asthma medications. Barriers such as physician financial reimbursement as well as licensing for rendering tele-healthcare services are important concerns. Other limitations of using technology resources in health care are related to liability, professionalism, and ethical issues such as breach of patient confidentiality and privacy. Additionally, there may be less face-to-face interaction and care of the patient when e-health is used.

Mobile Applications in Otolaryngology: A Systematic Review of the Literature, Apple App Store and the Google Play Store

OBJECTIVES

Although the last few years have seen an increased number of smartphone applications (apps) disseminated in the field of Otolaryngology (ORL), these apps vary widely in quality. The aim of this paper, therefore, is to systematically review ORL apps directed towards patients in mobile app stores and the current literature.

METHODS

The Google Play Store, Apple App Store and PubMed were searched for ORL apps for patients using various keywords pertaining to different ORL subspecialties. Apps not relevant to the scope of this research and/or duplicates, educational apps, apps promoting a business, apps requiring specific separate hardware, and apps in non-English were excluded. In PubMed, keywords pertaining to the subspecialties were combined with "mobile app" in a search query; literature reviews, editorials, case reports, conference papers, duplicate articles, and articles irrelevant to ORL apps were excluded. The quality of apps with the highest number of reviews was assessed using the "Mobile App Rating Scale" (MARS), while the quality of the articles was rated using "The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology" (STROBE) Statement.

RESULTS

After searching the app stores, 1074 apps were included and grouped according to their ORL subspecialties. The overall MARS score of the ten most popular apps in each category was 3.65 out of 5. A total of 636 articles were identified in the literature, and 193 were included. The mean adherence percentage of the articles to the STROBE checklist was of 84.37%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the apps currently available need further development, their application in ORL appears promising. Further dialogue between physicians and patients, as well as formal support from professional and scientific associations, should be encouraged.