Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Sensors (Basel) ; 21(22)2021 Nov 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34833636

ABSTRACT

The ability to monitor Sprained Ankle Rehabilitation Exercises (SPAREs) in home environments can help therapists ascertain if exercises have been performed as prescribed. Whilst wearable devices have been shown to provide advantages such as high accuracy and precision during monitoring activities, disadvantages such as limited battery life and users' inability to remember to charge and wear the devices are often the challenges for their usage. In addition, video cameras, which are notable for high frame rates and granularity, are not privacy-friendly. Therefore, this paper proposes the use and fusion of privacy-friendly and Unobtrusive Sensing Solutions (USSs) for data collection and processing during SPAREs in home environments. The present work aims to monitor SPAREs such as dorsiflexion, plantarflexion, inversion, and eversion using radar and thermal sensors. The main contributions of this paper include (i) privacy-friendly monitoring of SPAREs in a home environment, (ii) fusion of SPAREs data from homogeneous and heterogeneous USSs, and (iii) analysis and comparison of results from single, homogeneous, and heterogeneous USSs. Experimental results indicated the advantages of using heterogeneous USSs and data fusion. Cluster-based analysis of data gleaned from the sensors indicated an average classification accuracy of 96.9% with Neural Network, AdaBoost, and Support Vector Machine, amongst others.


Subject(s)
Ankle , Wearable Electronic Devices , Exercise Therapy , Humans , Monitoring, Physiologic , Radar
2.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ; 9(11): e30674, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34726613

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Managing the care of older adults with heart failure (HF) largely centers on medication management. Because of frequent medication or dosing changes, an app that supports these older adults in keeping an up-to-date list of medications could be advantageous. During the COVID-19 pandemic, HF outpatient consultations are taking place virtually or by telephone. An app with the capability to share a patient's medication list with health care professionals before consultation could support clinical efficiency, for example, by reducing consultation time. However, the influence of apps on maintaining an up-to-date medication history for older adults with HF in Ireland remains largely unexplored. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this review are twofold: to review apps with a medication list functionality and to assess the quality of the apps included in the review using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) and the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality scale. METHODS: A systematic search of apps was conducted in June 2019 using the Google Play Store and iTunes App Store. The MARS was used independently by 4 researchers to assess the quality of the apps using an Android phone and an iPad. Apps were also evaluated using the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality score. RESULTS: Google Play and iTunes App store searches identified 483 potential apps (292 from Google Play and 191 from iTunes App stores). A total of 6 apps (3 across both stores) met the inclusion criteria. Of the 6 apps, 4 achieved an acceptable MARS score (3/5). The Medisafe app had the highest overall MARS score (4/5), and the Medication List & Medical Records app had the lowest overall score (2.5/5). On average, the apps had 8 functions based on the IMS functionality criteria (range 5-11). A total of 2 apps achieved the maximum score for number of features (11 features) according to the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionality score, and 2 scored the lowest (5 features). Peer-reviewed publications were identified for 3 of the apps. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of current apps with medication list functionality varies according to their technical aspects. Most of the apps reviewed have an acceptable MARS objective quality (ie, the overall quality of an app). However, subjective quality (ie, satisfaction with the apps) was poor. Only 3 apps are based on scientific evidence and have been tested previously. A total of 2 apps featured all the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics functionalities, and half did not provide clear instructions on how to enter medication data, did not display vital parameter data in an easy-to-understand format, and did not guide users on how or when to take their medication.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Heart Failure , Mobile Applications , Aged , Delivery of Health Care , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Humans , Informatics , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
3.
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth ; 9(3): e21061, 2021 03 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33656444

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Approximately 50% of cardiovascular disease (CVD) cases are attributable to lifestyle risk factors. Despite widespread education, personal knowledge, and efficacy, many individuals fail to adequately modify these risk factors, even after a cardiovascular event. Digital technology interventions have been suggested as a viable equivalent and potential alternative to conventional cardiac rehabilitation care centers. However, little is known about the clinical effectiveness of these technologies in bringing about behavioral changes in patients with CVD at an individual level. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to identify and measure the effectiveness of digital technology (eg, mobile phones, the internet, software applications, wearables, etc) interventions in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and determine which behavior change constructs are effective at achieving risk factor modification in patients with CVD. METHODS: This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs designed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis) statement standard. Mixed data from studies extracted from selected research databases and filtered for RCTs only were analyzed using quantitative methods. Outcome hypothesis testing was set at 95% CI and P=.05 for statistical significance. RESULTS: Digital interventions were delivered using devices such as cell phones, smartphones, personal computers, and wearables coupled with technologies such as the internet, SMS, software applications, and mobile sensors. Behavioral change constructs such as cognition, follow-up, goal setting, record keeping, perceived benefit, persuasion, socialization, personalization, rewards and incentives, support, and self-management were used. The meta-analyzed effect estimates (mean difference [MD]; standard mean difference [SMD]; and risk ratio [RR]) calculated for outcomes showed benefits in total cholesterol SMD at -0.29 [-0.44, -0.15], P<.001; high-density lipoprotein SMD at -0.09 [-0.19, 0.00], P=.05; low-density lipoprotein SMD at -0.18 [-0.33, -0.04], P=.01; physical activity (PA) SMD at 0.23 [0.11, 0.36], P<.001; physical inactivity (sedentary) RR at 0.54 [0.39, 0.75], P<.001; and diet (food intake) RR at 0.79 [0.66, 0.94], P=.007. Initial effect estimates showed no significant benefit in body mass index (BMI) MD at -0.37 [-1.20, 0.46], P=.38; diastolic blood pressure (BP) SMD at -0.06 [-0.20, 0.08], P=.43; systolic BP SMD at -0.03 [-0.18, 0.13], P=.74; Hemoglobin A1C blood sugar (HbA1c) RR at 1.04 [0.40, 2.70], P=.94; alcohol intake SMD at -0.16 [-1.43, 1.10], P=.80; smoking RR at 0.87 [0.67, 1.13], P=.30; and medication adherence RR at 1.10 [1.00, 1.22], P=.06. CONCLUSIONS: Digital interventions may improve healthy behavioral factors (PA, healthy diet, and medication adherence) and are even more potent when used to treat multiple behavioral outcomes (eg, medication adherence plus). However, they did not appear to reduce unhealthy behavioral factors (smoking, alcohol intake, and unhealthy diet) and clinical outcomes (BMI, triglycerides, diastolic and systolic BP, and HbA1c).


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Blood Pressure , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Digital Technology , Exercise , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Factors
4.
Health Informatics J ; 26(3): 2280-2288, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31854212

ABSTRACT

An ageing population and chronic disease are putting pressure on the Irish health system. The field of eHealth is rapidly evolving and has the potential to become an important component of healthcare, but there appears to be a gap currently between research in this field and the integration of eHealth technology into clinical practice. During the eHealth Ireland Ecosystem Conference held in April 2018, a workshop was conducted to explore the barriers and facilitators to the adoption of eHealth technology, particularly remote monitoring systems in community and home cardiac care. Participants included clinicians, academic researchers, technologists, patient advocates, policy makers, and representatives from the health service. The conversations in the workshop pivoted around why technology systems in cardiac care rarely moved beyond the research project stage and what can be done to address this issue. The discussions in the workshop focused around the lack of funding available, the need for reimbursement models, the lack of awareness about remote monitoring, the angst about who is responsible for the data generated, the design of systems, regulatory standards, and the increasing demand on services, education, and patient empowerment.


Subject(s)
Ecosystem , Telemedicine , Communication , Humans , Patient Participation , Technology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...