16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Rapid Evidence Review of Mobile Applications for Self-management of Diabetes

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Patients with diabetes lack information on which commercially available applications (apps) improve diabetes-related outcomes. We conducted a rapid evidence review to examine features, clinical efficacy, and usability of apps for self-management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Mobile Applications for Diabetics: A Systematic Review and Expert-Based Usability Evaluation Considering the Special Requirements of Diabetes Patients Age 50 Years or Older

          Background A multitude of mhealth (mobile health) apps have been developed in recent years to support effective self-management of patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 or 2. Objective We carried out a systematic review of all currently available diabetes apps for the operating systems iOS and Android. We considered the number of newly released diabetes apps, range of functions, target user groups, languages, acquisition costs, user ratings, available interfaces, and the connection between acquisition costs and user ratings. Additionally, we examined whether the available applications serve the special needs of diabetes patients aged 50 or older by performing an expert-based usability evaluation. Methods We identified relevant keywords, comparative categories, and their specifications. Subsequently, we performed the app review based on the information given in the Google Play Store, the Apple App Store, and the apps themselves. In addition, we carried out an expert-based usability evaluation based on a representative 10% sample of diabetes apps. Results In total, we analyzed 656 apps finding that 355 (54.1%) offered just one function and 348 (53.0%) provided a documentation function. The dominating app language was English (85.4%, 560/656), patients represented the main user group (96.0%, 630/656), and the analysis of the costs revealed a trend toward free apps (53.7%, 352/656). The median price of paid apps was €1.90. The average user rating was 3.6 stars (maximum 5). Our analyses indicated no clear differences in the user rating between free and paid apps. Only 30 (4.6%) of the 656 available diabetes apps offered an interface to a measurement device. We evaluated 66 apps within the usability evaluation. On average, apps were rated best regarding the criterion “comprehensibility” (4.0 out of 5.0), while showing a lack of “fault tolerance” (2.8 out of 5.0). Of the 66 apps, 48 (72.7%) offered the ability to read the screen content aloud. The number of functions was significantly negative correlated with usability. The presence of documentation and analysis functions reduced the usability score significantly by 0.36 and 0.21 points. Conclusions A vast number of diabetes apps already exist, but the majority offer similar functionalities and combine only one to two functions in one app. Patients and physicians alike should be involved in the app development process to a greater extent. We expect that the data transmission of health parameters to physicians will gain more importance in future applications. The usability of diabetes apps for patients aged 50 or older was moderate to good. But this result applied mainly to apps offering a small range of functions. Multifunctional apps performed considerably worse in terms of usability. Moreover, the presence of a documentation or analysis function resulted in significantly lower usability scores. The operability of accessibility features for diabetes apps was quite limited, except for the feature “screen reader”.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Do Mobile Phone Applications Improve Glycemic Control (HbA1c) in the Self-management of Diabetes? A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and GRADE of 14 Randomized Trials.

            To investigate the effect of mobile phone applications (apps) on glycemic control (HbA1c) in the self-management of diabetes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Effectiveness of mHealth interventions for patients with diabetes: An overview of systematic reviews

              Background Diabetes is a common chronic disease that places an unprecedented strain on health care systems worldwide. Mobile health technologies such as smartphones, mobile applications, and wearable devices, known as mHealth, offer significant and innovative opportunities for improving patient to provider communication and self-management of diabetes. Objective The purpose of this overview is to critically appraise and consolidate evidence from multiple systematic reviews on the effectiveness of mHealth interventions for patients with diabetes to inform policy makers, practitioners, and researchers. Methods A comprehensive search on multiple databases was performed to identify relevant systematic reviews published between January 1996 and December 2015. Two authors independently selected reviews, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using AMSTAR. Results Fifteen systematic reviews published between 2008 and 2014 were eligible for inclusion. The quality of the reviews varied considerably and most of them had important methodological limitations. Focusing on systematic reviews that offered the most direct evidence, this overview demonstrates that on average, mHealth interventions improve glycemic control (HbA1c) compared to standard care or other non-mHealth approaches by as much as 0.8% for patients with type 2 diabetes and 0.3% for patients with type 1 diabetes, at least in the short-term (≤12 months). However, limitations in the overall quality of evidence suggest that further research will likely have an important impact in these estimates of effect. Conclusions Findings are consistent with clinically relevant improvements, particularly with respect to patients with type 2 diabetes. Similar to home telemonitoring, mHealth interventions represent a promising approach for self-management of diabetes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of General Internal Medicine
                J GEN INTERN MED
                Springer Nature
                0884-8734
                1525-1497
                May 8 2018
                Article
                10.1007/s11606-018-4410-1
                6025680
                29740786
                d60eabb4-4884-4fba-8b0d-c4a635e0486b
                © 2018

                http://www.springer.com/tdm

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article