ObjectiveThe Ubiquitous Spaced Retrieval-based Memory Advancement and Rehabilitation Training (USMART) program was developed by transforming the spaced retrieval-based memory training which consisted of 24 face-to-face sessions into a self-administered program with an iPAD app. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of USMART in elderly subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI).MethodsFeasibility was evaluated by checking the satisfaction of the participants with a 5-point Likert scale. The efficacy of the program on cognitive functions was evaluated by the Korean version of the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease Neuropsychological Assessment Battery before and after USMART.ResultsAmong the 10 participants, 7 completed both pre- and post-USMART assessments. The overall satisfaction score was 8.0±1.0 out of 10. The mean Word List Memory Test (WLMT) scores significantly increased after USMART training after adjusting for age, educational levels, baseline Mini-Mental Status Examination scores, and the number of training sessions (pre-USMART, 16.0±4.1; post-USMART, 17.9±4.5; p=0.014, RM-ANOVA). The magnitude of the improvements in the WLMT scores significantly correlated with the number of training sessions during 4 weeks (r=0.793; p=0.033).ConclusionUSMART was effective in improving memory and was well tolerated by most participants with MCI, suggesting that it may be a convenient and cost-effective alternative for the cognitive rehabilitation of elderly subjects with cognitive impairments. Further studies with large numbers of participants are necessary to examine the relationship between the number of training sessions and the improvements in memory function.

This telescreening test may overcome the limitations of test administration and may be a convenient and cost-effective alternative to the existing aphasia screening tests for patients with stroke.

We investigated the accuracy of pressure injury evaluation using tele‐devices and examined the concordance between automatically generated recommendations and primary manual recommendations. Caregivers took photos and videos of pressure injuries using smartphones with built‐in cameras and uploaded the media to the application. The wound team evaluated the wound using a specially modified version of the Pressure Sore Status Tool. This was compared with the Pressure Sore Status Tool score assessed during the actual examination of the patient. We developed an automatic algorithm for dressing based on the Pressure Sore Status Tool score, checking for consistency between this and the primary manual recommendation. A total of 60 patients diagnosed with pressure injuries were included. The κ coefficients indicated substantial agreement for wound size and total score, and excellent for all other items. We found that the overall concordance rates were statistically significant for all items (p < 0.001). For the primary dressing, the κ coefficient for the concordance rate of automatic algorithm and manual recommendation was 0.771, while that of teleconsultation system and manual recommendation was 0.971. For the secondary dressing, the figures were 0.798 and 0.989, respectively. All values were statistically significant (p < 0.001). We presented strong evidence documenting the utilization of a smartphone, patient‐driven system, and demonstrated that the measurements obtained were comparable to the ones obtained by a trained, on‐site, wound team. Furthermore, we confirmed agreement between automatically generated recommendations and primary manual recommendations.