Abbreviations: (app) application, (BG) blood glucose, (FTA) Few Touch Application, (HC) health care, (ICT) AbstractSelf-management is critical to achieving diabetes treatment goals. Mobile phones and Bluetooth ® can support self-management and lifestyle changes for chronic diseases such as diabetes. A mobile health (mHealth) research platform-the Few Touch Application (FTA)-is a tool designed to support the self-management of diabetes. The FTA consists of a mobile phone-based diabetes diary, which can be updated both manually from user input and automatically by wireless data transfer, and which provides personalized decision support for the achievement of personal health goals. Studies and applications (apps) based on FTAs have included:(1) automatic transfer of blood glucose (BG) data; (2) short message service (SMS)-based education for type 1 diabetes (T1DM); (3) a diabetes diary for type 2 diabetes (T2DM); (4) integrating a patient diabetes diary with health care (HC) providers; (5) a diabetes diary for T1DM; (6) a food picture diary for T1DM; (7) physical activity monitoring for T2DM; (8) nutrition information for T2DM; (9) context sensitivity in mobile self-help tools; and (10) modeling of BG using mobile phones.We have analyzed the performance of these 10 FTA-based apps to identify lessons for designing the most effective mHealth apps. From each of the 10 apps of FTA, respectively, we conclude: (1) automatic BG data transfer is easy to use and provides reassurance; (2) SMS-based education facilitates parent-child communication in T1DM; (3) the T2DM mobile phone diary encourages reflection; (4) the mobile phone diary enhances discussion between patients and HC professionals; (5) the T1DM mobile phone diary is useful and motivational; (6) the T1DM mobile phone picture diary is useful in identifying treatment obstacles; (7) the step counter with automatic data transfer promotes motivation and increases physical activity in T2DM; (8) food information on a phone for T2DM should not be at a detailed level; (9) context sensitivity has good prospects and is possible to implement on today's phones; and (10) BG modeling on mobile phones is promising for motivated T1DM users.

Background Person-centred care (PCC) focusing on personalised goals and care plans derived from “What matters to you?” has an impact on single disease outcomes, but studies on multi-morbid elderly are lacking. Furthermore, the combination of PCC, Integrated Care (IC) and Pro-active care are widely recognised as desirable for multi-morbid elderly, yet previous studies focus on single components only, leaving synergies unexplored. The effect of a synergistic intervention, which implements 1) Person-centred goal-oriented care driven by “What matters to you?” with 2) IC and 3) pro-active care is unknown. Methods Inspired by theoretical foundations, complexity science, previous health service research and a patient-driven evaluation of care quality, we designed the Patient-Centred Team (PACT) intervention across primary and secondary care. The PACT team collaborate with the patient to make and deliver a person-centred, integrated and proactive multi-morbidity care-plan. The control group receives conventional care. The study design is a pragmatic six months prospective, controlled clinical trial based on hospital electronic health record data of 439 multi-morbid frail elderly at risk for emergency (re) admissions referred to PACT and 779 propensity score matched controls in Norway, 2014–2016. Outcomes are emergency admissions, the sum of emergency inpatient bed days, 30-day readmissions, planned and emergency outpatient visits and mortality at three and six months follow-up. Results The Rate Ratios (RR) for emergency admissions was 0,9 (95%CI: 0,82-0,99), for sum of emergency bed days 0,68 (95%CI:0,52-0,79) and for 30-days emergency readmissions 0,72 (95%CI: 0,41-1,24). RRs were 2,3 (95%CI: 2,02-2,55) and 0,9 (95%CI: 0,68-1,20) for planned and emergency outpatient visits respectively. The RR for death at 3 months was 0,39 (95% CI: 0,22-0,70) and 0,57 (95% CI: 0,34-0,94) at 6 months. Conclusion Compared with propensity score matched controls, the care process of frail multi-morbid elderly who received the PACT intervention had a reduced risk of high-level emergency care, increased use of low-level planned care, and substantially reduced mortality risk. Further study of process differences between groups is warranted to understand the genesis of these results better. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02541474), registered Sept 2015.

ObjectiveTo assess whether colon cancer follow-up can be organised by general practitioners (GPs) without a decline in the patient's quality of life (QoL) and increase in cost or time to cancer diagnoses, compared to hospital follow-up.DesignRandomised controlled trial.SettingNorthern Norway Health Authority Trust, 4 trusts, 11 hospitals and 88 local communities.ParticipantsPatients surgically treated for colon cancer, hospital surgeons and community GPs.Intervention24-month follow-up according to national guidelines at the community GP office. To ensure a high follow-up guideline adherence, a decision support tool for patients and GPs were used.Main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were QoL, measured by the global health scales of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ C-30) and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). Secondary outcomes were cost-effectiveness and time to cancer diagnoses.Results110 patients were randomised to intervention (n=55) or control (n=55), and followed by 78 GPs (942 follow-up months) and 70 surgeons (942 follow-up months), respectively. Compared to baseline, there was a significant improvement in postoperative QoL (p=0.003), but no differences between groups were revealed (mean difference at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24-month follow-up appointments): Global Health; Δ−2.23, p=0.20; EQ-5D index; Δ−0.10, p=0.48, EQ-5D VAS; Δ−1.1, p=0.44. There were no differences in time to recurrent cancer diagnosis (GP 35 days vs surgeon 45 days, p=0.46); 14 recurrences were detected (GP 6 vs surgeon 8) and 7 metastases surgeries performed (GP 3 vs surgeon 4). The follow-up programme initiated 1186 healthcare contacts (GP 678 vs surgeon 508), 1105 diagnostic tests (GP 592 vs surgeon 513) and 778 hospital travels (GP 250 vs surgeon 528). GP organised follow-up was associated with societal cost savings (£8233 vs £9889, p<0.001).ConclusionsGP-organised follow-up was associated with no decline in QoL, no increase in time to recurrent cancer diagnosis and cost savings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00572143.

With an aging patient population and increasing complexity in patient disease trajectories, physicians are often met with complex patient histories from which clinical decisions must be made. Due to the increasing rate of adverse events and hospitals facing financial penalties for readmission, there has never been a greater need to enforce evidence-led medical decision-making using available health care data. In the present work, we studied a cohort of 7,741 patients, of whom 4,080 were diagnosed with cancer, surgically treated at a University Hospital in the years 2004–2012. We have developed a methodology that allows disease trajectories of the cancer patients to be estimated from free text in electronic health records (EHRs). By using these disease trajectories, we predict 80% of patient events ahead in time. By control of confounders from 8326 quantified events, we identified 557 events that constitute high subsequent risks (risk > 20%), including six events for cancer and seven events for metastasis. We believe that the presented methodology and findings could be used to improve clinical decision support and personalize trajectories, thereby decreasing adverse events and optimizing cancer treatment.