Background Individuals of all ages are becoming more health conscious, and wearable technology devices (eg, Fitbit and Apple Watch) are becoming increasingly popular in encouraging healthy lifestyles. Objective The aim of this paper was to explore how consumers use wearable devices. Methods A retrospective review was done on the top-rated verified purchase reviews of the Fitbit One posted on Amazon.com between January 2014 and August 2018. Relevant themes were identified by qualitatively analyzing open-ended reviews. Results On retrieval, there were 9369 reviews with 7706 positive reviews and 1663 critical reviews. The top 100 positive and top 100 critical comments were subsequently analyzed. Four major themes were identified: sleep hygiene (“charts when you actually fall asleep, when you wake up during the night, when you're restless--and gives you a cumulative time of “actual sleep” as well as weekly averages.”), motivation (“25 lbs lost after 8 months – best motivator ever!”), accountability (“platform to connect with people you know and set little competitions or group…fun accountability if you set a goal with a friend/family.”), and discretion (“able to be clipped to my bra without being seen.”). Alternatively, negative reviewers felt that the wearable device’s various tracking functions, specifically steps and sleep, were inaccurate. Conclusions Wearable technology devices are an affordable, user-friendly application that can support all individuals throughout their everyday lives and potentially be implemented into medical surveillance, noninvasive medical care, and mobile health and wellness monitoring. This study is the first to explore wearable technology device use among consumers, and further studies are needed to examine the limitless possibilities of wearable devices in health care.

Importance: Genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) is a chronic, progressive condition frequently manifesting as vaginal dryness and pain with intercourse. Survey data indicate this is a highly prevalent, likely underreported, condition that profoundly affects quality of life for millions of women. Vaginal lasers demonstrate promise as an effective, nonhormone therapeutic alternative for GSM; however, the risks associated with them may have been overstated. Objective: Despite reports of improved sexual and vaginal comfort without serious safety concerns, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a 2018 safety communication warning against it. We conducted a systematic literature review and surveyed both the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) and Bloomberg Law Databases to evaluate risks associated with laser treatment for GSM. Evidence Review: A systematic literature review identified articles published before September 2019. The MAUDE database was searched by name from 2009 to 2019 for safety claims for 24 vaginal laser devices. The Bloomberg Law database was searched for product liability claims against any vaginal laser device manufacturer before July 2019. Findings: Literature review revealed 3 publications detailing 29 presumptive laser-associated complications, only 5 of which (17.2%) reported worsening symptoms after treatment. The MAUDE database contained 120 complaints; only 30 (25%) detailed potential adverse patient events, most frequently pain (n = 12) and burning (n = 10). The Bloomberg law database contained no claims asserting harm from device use. Conclusions and Relevance: Lacking strong evidence indicating significant patient risk for vaginal laser treatment of GSM, the FDA safety communication appears unsubstantiated and implies gender bias. Identified complications suggest most reported “adverse events” represent lack of treatment effect. The well-documented benefits and low risk of adverse event suggest laser therapy for GSM is reasonable with appropriate pretreatment counseling. Additional randomized, well-controlled clinical trials are needed to further elucidate both the safety and efficacy of this nonhormone therapy.

No abstract

Background: Parents are active participants in the referral process of children with non-life-threatening surgical pathologies. Nonetheless, there is scarce literature about the influence of parent’s level of income and perception of their children’s conditions on their decision process. Our study aims at expanding our knowledge about this parameter. We focused our research on parents of children spina bifida occulta (SBO), a condition that with a broad clinical impact and that often requires timely referral. Methods: Questionnaires in Mandarin were administered to parents of patients presenting to the neurosurgery clinic of a children’s hospital in Shanghai. Participants were grouped according to the level of income, above and below 50,000 Yuan. The SBO was classified into two groups, with and without evident subcutaneous mass. Results: One hundred and forty-five participants completed the questionnaire. Regardless of the type of lesion, families with lower income attributed their concerns for seeking care to their local physicians and the lack of health resources. Families with higher income exhibited fear of treatment. The lower income cohort presented for treatment at an older age than a higher income group. Patients with subcutaneous mass presented for treatment at a younger age than those that did not exhibit mass. Conclusion: Parental social economic background and visual presentation of SBO have to be factored when analyzing their decision-making process when seeking care for their children. Parental factors can be barriers to surgical care. Healthcare providers must bring parents to the forefront of the treatment process.

No abstract