Smartphone use in Paediatric Practice: a national survey

Hadjipanayis, Adamos; Klonis, Alexios; Abdel-Mannan, Omar Assem; Sutcliffe, Alastair

doi:10.7309/jmtm.5.1.2

Cited by 4 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the 74 PDCs identified on the screened stores, 13 (17.6%) had been downloaded over 100,000 times. Our findings thus echoed those of earlier studies highlighting the widespread use of mHealth apps among clinicians, including pediatricians [1,3].…”

Section: Principal Findingssupporting

confidence: 87%

See 1 more Smart Citation

CE Accreditation and Barriers to CE Marking of Pediatric Drug Calculators for Mobile Devices: Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis

Koldeweij¹,

Clarke²,

Nijman³

et al. 2021

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Pediatric drug calculators (PDCs) intended for clinical use qualify as medical devices under the Medical Device Directive and the Medical Device Regulation. The extent to which they comply with European standards on quality and safety is unknown. Objective This study determines the number of PDCs available as mobile apps for use in the Netherlands that bear a CE mark, and explore the factors influencing the CE marking of such devices among app developers. Methods A scoping review of Google Play Store and Apple App Store was conducted to identify PDCs available for download in the Netherlands. CE accreditation of the sampled apps was determined by consulting the app landing pages on app stores, by screening the United Kingdom Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s online registry of medical devices, and by surveying app developers. The barriers to CE accreditation were also explored through a survey of app developers. Results Of 632 screened apps, 74 were eligible, including 60 pediatric drug dosage calculators and 14 infusion rate calculators. One app was CE marked. Of the 20 (34%) respondents to the survey, 8 considered their apps not to be medical devices based on their intent of use or functionality. Three developers had not aimed to make their app available for use in Europe. Other barriers that may explain the limited CE accreditation of sampled PDC apps included poor awareness of European regulations among developers and a lack of restrictions when placing PDCs in app stores. Conclusions The compliance of PDCs with European standards on medical devices is poor. This puts clinicians and their patients at risk of medical errors resulting from the largely unrestricted use of these apps.

show abstract

Section: Principal Findingssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…The use of mobile health (mHealth) apps among clinicians is growing [1,2]. In 2015, 60% of medical doctors in the Netherlands used at least 1 mHealth app [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CE Accreditation and Barriers to CE Marking of Pediatric Drug Calculators for Mobile Devices: Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis

Koldeweij¹,

Clarke²,

Nijman³

et al. 2021

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A total of 3 studies recruited only general practitioners (GPs) [ 22 , 33 , 39 ], another 3 studies recruited only specialists [ 34 , 35 , 37 ], and 4 studies recruited both GPs and specialists [ 5 , 36 , 38 , 40 ]. The participants in the remaining studies were addressed as anesthetist consultants [ 34 ], pediatricians [ 35 ], specialists, or surgeons. Overall, 4 studies did not provide information on their clinical settings [ 5 , 33 , 35 , 36 ], 2 studies were conducted in hospitals [ 34 , 38 ], and the remaining studies were conducted in community health centers [ 22 ], large university surgical departments [ 37 ], rural practices [ 39 ], and health institutions [ 40 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The participants in the remaining studies were addressed as anesthetist consultants [ 34 ], pediatricians [ 35 ], specialists, or surgeons. Overall, 4 studies did not provide information on their clinical settings [ 5 , 33 , 35 , 36 ], 2 studies were conducted in hospitals [ 34 , 38 ], and the remaining studies were conducted in community health centers [ 22 ], large university surgical departments [ 37 ], rural practices [ 39 ], and health institutions [ 40 ]. The characteristics and details of the included studies on the use of smartphones and mobile apps by physicians are presented in Tables 1 and 2 ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smartphone and Mobile App Use Among Physicians in Clinical Practice: Scoping Review

Lee¹,

Mahmood²,

Lee³

et al. 2023

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Health care professionals are increasingly using smartphones in clinical care. Smartphone use can affect patient quality of care and clinical outcomes. Objective This scoping review aimed to describe how physicians use smartphones and mobile apps in clinical settings. Methods We conducted a scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and reported the results according to PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. We used the following databases in our literature search: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and gray literature for studies published since 2010. An additional search was also performed by scanning the reference lists of included studies. A narrative synthesis approach was used. Results A total of 10 studies, published between 2016 and 2021, were included in this review. Of these studies, 8 used surveys and 2 used surveys with focus group study designs to explore smartphone use, its adoption, experience of using it, and views on the use of smartphones among physicians. There were studies with only general practitioners (n=3), studies with only specialists (n=3), and studies with both general practitioners and specialists (n=4). Physicians use smartphones and mobile apps for communication (n=9), clinical decision-making (n=7), drug compendium (n=7), medical education and training (n=7), maintaining health records (n=4), managing time (n=4), and monitoring patients (n=2) in clinical practice. The Medscape medical app was frequently used for information gathering. WhatsApp, a nonmedical app, was commonly used for physician-patient communication. The commonly reported barriers were lack of regulatory oversight, privacy concerns, and limited Wi-Fi or internet access. The commonly reported facilitator was convenience and having access to evidence-based medicine, clinical decision-making support, and a wide array of apps. Conclusions Smartphones and mobile apps were used for communication, medical education and training, clinical decision-making, and drug compendia in most studies. Although the benefits of smartphones and mobile apps for physicians at work were promising, there were concerns about patient privacy and confidentiality. Legislation is urgently needed to protect the liability of health care professionals using smartphones.

show abstract

“…The modern teleconsultation technologies are helping the young surgeons learn various skills. [9][10][11][12] An efficient and reliable teleconsultation technology must convey the details accurately. The WhatsApp app has enhanced the smartphone's efficacy remarkably to transmit standard photographs in clinical and academic settings with its failsafe and encrypted transmission technology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Efficiency of WhatsApp in Teleconsultation of Finger Vascularity in Hand Surgery

Raveendran

Thomas

Jayaseelan

2020

Journal of Hand and Microsurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Teleconsultation over the smartphone is now widely used in modern medicine in the management of burns, flap cover, upper extremity trauma, and in the assessment of the feasibility of reimplantation in amputated fingers. The development of the WhatsApp application has enhanced the smartphone's efficiency remarkably to transmit images in clinical and academic settings with its failsafe and encrypted technology. In hand surgery, a teleconsultation technology must communicate details of finger vascularity effectively. However, there is a paucity of evidence on the functionality of these modern teleconsultation technologies in Hand Surgery. Here, the authors have estimated the efficiency of the WhatsApp teleconsultation in the assessment of finger vascularity. Materials and Methods In two phases, the authors transmitted clinical photographs of vascular and avascular fingers to experienced hand surgeons over the WhatsApp and asked them to assess the finger vascularity. The efficiency of the WhatsApp teleconsultation in assessing the details of finger vascularity was estimated from their responses. Results Despite 81.06% of the hand surgeons rating the vascular fingers on the transmitted photographs correctly, only 44.95% detected the avascular digits accurately; that is, 55.05% of the surgeons failed to diagnose the avascularity of fingers. This suggests serious implications in a clinical setting. The intra- and the inter-rater reliability values were 0.232 and 0.6086 (with 95% confidence interval), respectively, which indicated poor reliability of the WhatsApp teleconsultation regarding the assessment of finger vascularity. Conclusion The authors, therefore, conclude that WhatsApp is inadequate in teleconsultation given the value of vascularity details of the fingers in making a diagnosis in hand surgery.

show abstract

Smartphone use in Paediatric Practice: a national survey

Cited by 4 publications

References 12 publications

CE Accreditation and Barriers to CE Marking of Pediatric Drug Calculators for Mobile Devices: Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis

CE Accreditation and Barriers to CE Marking of Pediatric Drug Calculators for Mobile Devices: Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis

Smartphone and Mobile App Use Among Physicians in Clinical Practice: Scoping Review

The Efficiency of WhatsApp in Teleconsultation of Finger Vascularity in Hand Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About