OBJECTIVE: The main objective was to examine the short- and long-term effects of SMS text messaging on exercise frequency in older adults. Secondary objectives were to investigate how SMS text messages impact study participants' exercise frequency and the effects of the intervention on secondary outcomes.
METHODS: The Malaysian Physical Activity for Health Study (myPAtHS) was a 24-week, 2-arm, parallel randomized controlled trial conducted in urban Malaysia. Participants were recruited via health talks in resident associations and religious facilities. Older Malaysians (aged 55-70 years) who used mobile phones and did not exercise regularly were eligible to participate in the study. Participants randomly allocated to the SMS texting arm received an exercise booklet and 5 weekly SMS text messages over 12 weeks. The content of the SMS text messages was derived from effective behavior change techniques. The non-SMS texting arm participants received only the exercise booklet. Home visits were conducted to collect outcome data: (1) exercise frequency at 12 and 24 weeks, (2) secondary outcome data (exercise self-efficacy, physical activity-related energy expenditure, sitting time, body mass index, grip and leg strength) at baseline and at 12 and 24 weeks. Intention-to-treat procedures were applied for data analysis. Semistructured interviews focusing primarily on the SMS text messages and their impact on exercise frequency were conducted at weeks 12 and 24.
RESULTS: In total, 43 participants were randomized into the SMS texting arm (n=22) and the non-SMS texting arm (n=21). Study-unrelated injuries forced 4 participants to discontinue after a few weeks (they were not included in any analyses). Overall retention was 86% (37/43). After 12 weeks, SMS texting arm participants exercised significantly more than non-SMS texting arm participants (mean difference 1.21 times, bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap [BCa] 95% CI 0.18-2.24). Interview analysis revealed that the SMS text messages positively influenced SMS texting arm participants who experienced exercise barriers. They described the SMS text messages as being encouraging, a push, and a reminder. After 24 weeks, there was no significant difference between the research arms (mean difference 0.74, BCa 95% CI -0.30 to 1.76). There were no significant effects for secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that SMS text messaging is effective in promoting exercise in older adults from an upper-middle-income country. Although the effects were not maintained when SMS text messaging ceased, the results are promising and warrant more research on behavioral mobile health interventions in other regions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02123342; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02123342 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6eGSsu2EI).
METHODS: A random pair of neurosurgery resident and specialist conducted consecutive virtual and physical ward rounds on neurocritical patients. A virtual ward round was first conducted remotely by a specialist who received real-time audiovisual information from a resident wearing smart glasses integrated with telemedicine. Subsequently, a physical ward round was performed together by the resident and specialist on the same patient. The management plans of both ward rounds were compared, and the intrarater reliability was measured. On study completion a qualitative survey was performed.
RESULTS: Ten paired ward rounds were performed on 103 neurocritical care patients with excellent overall intrarater reliability. Nine out of 10 showed good to excellent internal consistency, and 1 showed acceptable internal consistency. Qualitative analysis indicated wide user acceptance and high satisfaction rate with the alternative method.
CONCLUSIONS: Virtual ward rounds using telemedicine via smart glasses on neurosurgical patients in critical care were feasible, effective, and widely accepted as an alternative to physical ward rounds during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.
METHODS: A review and comparison of mHealth apps in pediatric care found in Google's Play Store (Android system) and Apple's App Store (iOS system) were performed. For the structured review of the available literature, Google Scholar, PubMed, IEEE Xplore Digital Library, and Science Direct online databases were used for the literature search. The assessment criteria used for comparison included requirement for Internet connection, size of application, information on disease, diagnostic tools, medical calculator, information on disease treatments, dosage recommendations, and drug interaction checker.
RESULTS: Fifty mHealth apps for general pediatric care and 8 mHealth apps for specific pediatric diseases were discussed in the literature. Of the 90 mHealth apps we reviewed, 27 that fulfilled the study criteria were selected for quality assessment. Medscape, Skyscape, and iGuideline scored the highest (score=7), while PediaBP scored the lowest (score=3).
CONCLUSIONS: Medscape, Skyscape, and iGuideline are the most comprehensive mHealth apps for HCPs as quick references for pediatric care. More studies about mHealth apps in pediatric care are warranted to ensure the quality and reliability of mHealth apps.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to analyze and evaluate the contents as well as features of COVID-19 mobile apps. The findings are instrumental in helping health care professionals to identify suitable mobile apps for COVID-19 self-monitoring and education. The results of the mobile apps' assessment could potentially help mobile app developers improve or modify their existing mobile app designs to achieve optimal outcomes.
METHODS: The search for the mHealth apps available in the android-based Play Store and the iOS-based App Store was conducted between April 18 and May 5, 2020. The region of the App Store where we performed the search was the United States, and a virtual private network app was used to locate and access COVID-19 mobile apps from all countries on the Google Play Store. The inclusion criteria were apps that are related to COVID-19 with no restriction in language type. The basic features assessment criteria used for comparison were the requirement for free subscription, internet connection, education or advisory content, size of the app, ability to export data, and automated data entry. The functionality of the apps was assessed according to knowledge (information on COVID-19), tracing or mapping of COVID-19 cases, home monitoring surveillance, online consultation with a health authority, and official apps run by health authorities.
RESULTS: Of the 223 COVID-19-related mobile apps, only 30 (19.9%) found in the App Store and 28 (44.4%) in the Play Store matched the inclusion criteria. In the basic features assessment, most App Store (10/30, 33.3%) and Play Store (10/28, 35.7%) apps scored 4 out of 7 points. Meanwhile, the outcome of the functionality assessment for most App Store apps (13/30, 43.3%) was a score of 3 compared to android-based apps (10/28, 35.7%), which scored 2 (out of the maximum 5 points). Evaluation of the basic functions showed that 75.0% (n=36) of the 48 included mobile apps do not require a subscription, 56.3% (n=27) provide symptom advice, and 41.7% (n=20) have educational content. In terms of the specific functions, more than half of the included mobile apps are official mobile apps maintained by a health authority for COVID-19 information provision. Around 37.5% (n=18) and 31.3% (n=15) of the mobile apps have tracing or mapping and home monitoring surveillance functions, respectively, with only 17% (n=8) of the mobile apps equipped with an online consultation function.
CONCLUSIONS: Most iOS-based apps incorporate infographic mapping of COVID-19 cases, while most android-based apps incorporate home monitoring surveillance features instead of providing focused educational content on COVID-19. It is important to evaluate the contents and features of COVID-19 mobile apps to guide users in choosing a suitable mobile app based on their requirements.
Results: A total of 506 dental professionals participated in the study with the response rate of 89.39%. More than half of the participants (50-75%) endorsed that teledentistry is a useful tool for improving clinical practice as well as patient care. Two-thirds of the participants (69.96%) considered that teledentistry would reduce cost for the dental practices. On the other hand, about 50-70% of dental professionals expressed their concerns regarding the security of the data and consent of patients. The most preferred communication tool for teledentistry was reported to be videoconference followed by phone. The majority of participants recommended the use of teledentistry in the specialty of oral medicine, operative dentistry, and periodontics. There was a significant difference between the age, experience of dentists, and their qualifications with domains of teledentistry.
Conclusions: The overall impact of dental professionals towards teledentistry was positive with adequate willingness to incorporate this modality in their clinical practice. However, the perceived concerns pertaining to teledentistry are significant impediments towards its integration within the oral health system. An in-depth study of its business model and cost-benefit needs of time, especially in the context of developing countries, in order to avail the optimum benefits of teledentistry.