OBJECTIVE: In our present study, we explored patents associated with various biomedical applications of polyhydroxyalkanoates.
METHOD: Patent databases of European Patent Office, United States Patent and Trademark Office and World Intellectual Property Organization were mined. We developed an intensive exploration approach to eliminate overlapping patents and sort out significant patents.We demarcated the keywords and search criterions and established search patterns for the database request. We retrieved documents within the recent 6 years, 2010 to 2016 and sort out the collected data stepwise to gather the most appropriate documents in patent families for further scrutiny.
RESULTS: By this approach, we retrieved 23,368 patent documents from all the three databases and the patent titles were further analyzed for the relevance of polyhydroxyalkanoates in biomedical applications. This ensued in the documentation of approximately 226 significant patents associated with biomedical applications of polyhydroxyalkanoates and the information was classified into six major groups. Polyhydroxyalkanoates has been patented in such a way that their applications are widely distributed in the medical industry, drug delivery system, dental material, tissue engineering, packagingmaterial as well as other useful products.
CONCLUSION: There are many avenues through which PHA & PHB could be used. Our analysis shows patent information can be used to identify various applications of PHA and its representatives in the biomedical field. Upcoming studies can focus on the application of PHA in the different field to discover the related topics and associate to this study.We believe that this approach of analysis and findings can initiate new researchers to undertake similar kind of studies in their represented field to fill the gap between the patent articles and research publications.
METHODS: This scoping review was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis and PRISMA statement for scoping review. Published reviews on disinvestment were identified from scientific databases including health technology assessment (HTA) Web sites using the terms "disinvestment," "health technology reassessment," and "healthcare." The data obtained was synthesized narratively to identify similarities and differences across the approaches based on the prespecified categories.
RESULTS: Seventeen reviews were included with thirty-four initiatives identified across sixteen countries at various levels of implementation and responsible agencies for the activities. Two most used methods to facilitate disinvestment decisions are Programme Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA) and HTA. Stakeholder involvement is the most important aspect to be addressed, as it acts as both facilitator and barrier in disinvestment initiatives implementation.
CONCLUSIONS: Disinvestment programs have been implemented at multilevel, involving multistakeholders and using multiple methods such as PBMA and HTA. However, there is a lack of clarity on the additional dimensions of technical analysis related to these tools. Further research could focus on technology optimization in healthcare as part of overall health technology management.
OBJECTIVE: To address this gap in research, this scoping review aims to determine the facilitators and barriers to implementing DHTs in LMIC hospital settings following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the review outlined the types of DHTs that have been implemented in LMICs' hospitals during this pandemic and finally developed a classification framework to categorize the landscape of DHTs.
METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies published from March 2020 to December 2023. We extracted data on authors, publication years, study objectives, study countries, disease conditions, types of DHTs, fields of clinical medicine where the DHTs are applied, study designs, sample sizes, characteristics of the study population, study location, and data collection methods of the included studies. Both quantitative and qualitative data were utilized to conduct a thematic analysis, using a deductive method based on the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM), to identify facilitators and barriers to DHT implementation. Finally, all accessible DHTs were identified and organized to create a novel classification framework.
RESULTS: Twelve studies were included from 292 retrieved articles. Telemedicine (n=5) was the most commonly used DHT in LMICs' hospitals, followed by hospital information systems (n=4), electronic medical records (n=2), and mobile health (n=1). These 4 DHTs, among the other existing DHTs, allowed us to develop a novel classification framework for DHTs. The included studies used qualitative methods (n=4), which included interviews and focus groups, quantitative methods (n=5), or a combination of both (n=2). Among the 64 facilitators of DHT implementation, the availability of continuous on-the-job training (n=3), the ability of DHTs to prevent cross-infection (n=2), and positive previous experiences using DHTs (n=2) were the top 3 reported facilitators. However, of the 44 barriers to DHT implementation, patients with poor digital literacy and skills in DHTs (n=3), inadequate awareness regarding DHTs among health care professionals and stakeholders (n=2), and concerns regarding the accuracy of disease diagnosis and treatment through DHTs (n=2) were commonly reported.
CONCLUSIONS: In the postpandemic era, telemedicine, along with other DHTs, has seen increased implementation in hospitals within LMICs. All facilitators and barriers can be categorized into 6 themes, namely, (1) Aspects of the Health Care System; (2) Perspectives of Patients; (3) External Environment; (4) Implementation of Sustainable Infrastructure; (5) Characteristics of Health Care Organization; and (6) Characteristics of Patients.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to gain insight into (1) access and utilization of communication technology (eg, landline phone, internet, mobile phone), (2) acceptability of mHealth-based interventions for HIV prevention services, and (3) preferences regarding the format and frequency of mHealth interventions among Malaysian men who have sex with men.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey with Malaysian men who have sex with men between July 2018 and March 2020. Participants were recruited using respondent-driven sampling in the Greater Kuala Lumpur region of Malaysia. We collected information on demographic characteristics, HIV risk-related behaviors, access to and the frequency of use of communication technology, and acceptability of using mHealth for HIV prevention using a self-administered questionnaire with a 5-point scale (1, never; 2, rarely; 3, sometimes; 4, often; 5, all the time).
RESULTS: A total of 376 men participated in the survey. Almost all respondents owned or had access to a smartphone with internet access (368/376, 97.9%) and accessed the internet daily (373/376, 99.2%), mainly on a smartphone (334/376, 88.8%). Participants on average used smartphones primarily for social networking (mean 4.5, SD 0.8), followed by sending or receiving emails (mean 4.0, SD 1.0), and searching for health-related information (mean 3.5, SD 0.9). There was high acceptance of the use of mHealth for HIV prevention (mean 4.1, SD 1.5), including for receiving HIV prevention information (345/376, 91.8%), receiving medication reminders (336/376, 89.4%), screening and monitoring sexual activity (306/376, 81.4%) or illicit drug use (281/376, 74.7%), and monitoring drug cravings (280/376, 74.5%). Participants overwhelmingly preferred a smartphone app over other modalities (eg, text, phone call, email) for engaging in mHealth HIV prevention tools. Preference for app notifications ranged from 186/336 (53.9%), for receiving HIV prevention information, to 212/336 (69.3%), for screening and monitoring sexual activity. Acceptance of mHealth was higher for those who were university graduates (P=.003), living in a relationship with a partner (P=.04), engaged in sexualized drug use (P=.01), and engaged in receptive anal sex (P=.006).
CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study provide support for developing and deploying mHealth strategies for HIV prevention using a smartphone app in men who have sex with men-a key population with suboptimal engagement in HIV prevention and treatment.