| Literature DB >> 23458994 |
Caroline Free1, Gemma Phillips, Louise Watson, Leandro Galli, Lambert Felix, Phil Edwards, Vikram Patel, Andy Haines.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mobile health interventions could have beneficial effects on health care delivery processes. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of controlled trials of mobile technology interventions to improve health care delivery processes. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23458994 PMCID: PMC3566926 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001363
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Med ISSN: 1549-1277 Impact factor: 11.069
Figure 1PRISMA 2009 flow diagram.
Interventions applied for medical education.
| Study | Study Design, Country, Device, Media | Participants | Aims | Intervention | Comparator |
|
| Other; | 76 medical-surgical second years. Mean age: Control = 20 y; Intervention = 22.5 y | To investigate whether the use of PDAs enhanced nursing students' pharmacological knowledge during clinical practice in the medical-surgical area. | Nursing students in the experimental group each were provided with a PDA loaded with the MIMS for PDAs, a drug reference guide for Australian professionals, as well as two Excel documents, a student appraisal tool, and a medical-surgical nursing skills checklist. Duration: 3 wk | The control group completed a similar clinical placement without access to a PDA. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 36 second-year baccalaureate nursing students in one of two community acute care hospitals. | To determine if the use of a PDA influences the students' preparedness for the safe administration of medications and enhances the students' self-efficacy. | The PDA was loaded with software including a laboratory and diagnostic reference, a drug reference book, and a medical-surgical procedure resource from Elsevier Publishing. | The control groups were given access to paper versions of the same resources that were given to the intervention group. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 114 fourth-year undergraduates in their senior clerkship. Mean age: Control = 22.4 y (SD: 1.1); Intervention = 22.5 y (SD: 1.3). | To test whether providing medical students with a handheld computer clinical decision support tool could improve learning in evidence based medicine. | The intervention is InfoRetriever software loaded onto a PDA. It contains seven evidence databases clinical decision rules and practice guidelines, risk calculators, and basic information on drugs. This software as well as a digital version of the pocket card were loaded onto a PDA. Duration: 16 wk. | The control group received a pocket card containing guidelines such as the evidence-based decision-making cycle, levels, and sources of evidence, and abbreviated guidelines on appraising the relevance and validity of articles about diagnostic tests, prognosis, treatment, and practice guidelines. The card was designed to remind and prompt students to apply evidence-based medicine techniques in their clinical learning. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 52 first-year medical residents rotating on a general medical hospital service. | To design, implement, and evaluate the educational effectiveness of a PDA-based geriatric assessment tool among internal medical students. | A geriatric assessment tool was developed based on an 8-module course. First-year residents who were PDA users were randomised to receive the geriatric assessment tool software on their PDA. Performance on a pre/post test and tabulation of geriatric functional issues identified on hospital dismissal summaries were the outcomes measured. Duration: 1 y | Participants in the control group owned a PDA, but did not receive the geriatric assessment tool software on the device. They had web-based access to the geriatric assessment tool, as did the intervention group. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 72 first-year residents rotating on the primary care internal medicine and geriatrics hospital service. | To evaluate the educational effectiveness of a PDA-based GAT. | At the outset of their rotations, all residents received instruction focusing on geriatric functional assessment. Eight topics were presented: ADL, IADL, cognition, mobility, depression, delirium, malnutrition, and risk of adverse drug events. Functional assessment measures for the 8 lecture modules were incorporated into a web-based application and the intervention group had this application loaded onto their PDAs. Duration: 1 mo | Control group had access to this information, but not on PDA. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 122 third-year medical students. | To determine if a PDA-based smoking cessation counselling tool can improve medical student smoking cessation counselling. | All students underwent a workshop on motivational interviewing. The intervention group received a paper-based summary of motivational interviewing techniques relating to SCC following the workshop, and also E-SMOKE-I.T. Software loaded onto their PDA. The software helps users determine a patient's stage of change, provides scripted motivational interviews targeted to their stage, and makes relevant health behaviour and stage-based interventions immediately accessible. A smoking cessation counselling assessment tool was developed and validated to assess students' expertise. Duration: 4 wk | The control group received a paper-based summary of motivational interviewing techniques related to smoking cessation counselling following the workshop. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 30 residents willing to attend five prescheduled midday conferences. | To assess whether medical resident participation in educational conferences using mobile iPod technology enhances both medical knowledge and accessibility when compared to residents only participating in person. | Residents were required to be absent from the five lunchtime conferences, to download the conferences from the Duke University iTunes website, transfer to the iPod, and listen to them. Duration: 1 mo | Control group were required to attend a specific series of five, 1-hour midday conferences. These attendees were allowed to leave the conference for personal or patient care issues. |
ADL, activities of daily living; IADL, instrumental activities of daily living; MIMS, Monthly Index of Medical Specialties; RCT, randomized controlled trial.
Interventions applied for clinical diagnosis and management.
| Study | Study Design, Country, Device, Media | Participants | Aims | Intervention | Comparator |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 66 internal medicine residents assigned to an urban university-based, resident-staffed clinic. Mean age: Control = 28.6 y (SD 2.28), 72% male; Intervention = 27.4 y (SD 2.18), 74% male | To determine whether clinicians provided with a CDSS that provides recommendations for risk assessment and treatment prescribe NSAID more safely than clinicians without that support. What is the impact of the CDSS on participants' gathering key risk factor data? | Medical residents received a PDA-based CDSS suite. This included a prediction rule for NSAID-related gastrointestinal risk assessment and treatment recommendations. Unannounced standardised patients trained to portray musculoskeletal symptoms presented to intervention group. Safety outcomes were assessed from the prescriptions given to standardised patents and judged as safe or unsafe. | Control group did not receive the prediction rule for NSAID-related gastrointestinal risk assessment and treatment recommendations. |
|
| Crossover trial; | Credentialed sonologists | To compare high-resolution thermal printer ultrasound images and images recorded and transmitted via commercial camera cell phones. | 2 credentialed emergency sonologists with extensive ultrasound experience were asked to evaluate images on a cell phone. A limited clinical vignette was then read to each of the 2 reviewers describing patient complaint and area of the body being scanned. Reviewers were also asked if any pathology was seen in the image, if any measurements were present and what they were, and if a diagnosis could be given and to list major visible structures. Finally, each reviewer was asked if the image being viewed was either suboptimal for review or contained image artefacts other than expected from ultrasound. | 2 wk later the process was repeated for the thermal printer images, or originals. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | Intensive care nurses | To evaluate a computer-based scoring tool in an ICU. User satisfaction, time needed to score a patient and workflow change were assessed, and scores generated manually and by computer were compared. | CORE10TISS, TISS28, TISS76, APACHE2, and SAPS2 are scores that must be calculated daily for each patient in ICU. Prior to the intervention all results were calculated manually; this intervention introduces a method of scoring using a tablet PC. An evaluation protocol was developed to assess workflow analysis, time series questionnaire technology, time consumption, and score values. | Scoring was performed and timed manually. |
|
| Crossover RCT; | 4 certified registered nurse anaesthetists (CRNA) | To evaluate a method for examining the effect of CADM on the accuracy and speed of problem solving during simulated critical patient care events. | A PDA was pre-programmed with a catalogue of common and uncommon clinical events that provided a protocol-driven, interventional approach to management. Two patient care scenarios were developed for this study. Within each scenario, the simulated patient's problem or condition, if left unattended, could lead to a critical incident. scenarios. CRNA performance with and without CADM technology was evaluated. | Control participants were instructed to use their own knowledge, beliefs, customary approaches, and experiences. |
|
| Non-randomised cross-sectional; | 87 undergraduate nurses | To determine whether nursing medication errors could be reduced and nursing care provided more efficiently using PDA technology | Students in the intervention group used PDAs equipped with a drug program created for health care providers, which is continually reviewed and updated with more than 3,500 brand and generic drugs | Students in the control group could use textbooks and reference books found on most clinical units, such as medical-surgical nursing textbooks, pharmacology textbooks, a drug reference guide, and a calculator. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 18 30–75 y olds presenting to see their family physicians with symptoms judged to be possible new-onset angina | To determine the effectiveness of a PDA software application to help family physicians diagnose angina among patients with chest pain | Physicians in the intervention arm received Palm OS-based hand-held computers loaded with the angina software. Monthly reminders were sent to all physicians (control and intervention) to maximize patient recruitment and to minimize recall bias. Duration: 7 mo | Physicians in the control group were instructed to continue to manage patients presenting with chest pain in their normal manner. |
|
| 3 arm parallel group RCT; | 30 health care providers from primary care | To determine the effectiveness of adding photos to clinical history on diagnostic confidence with (1) photos viewed on mobile phones and (2)photos viewed via email. | Health care providers were provided with 10 clinical case histories and allocated to one of 2 interventions either to view photos of these clinical conditions on a mobile phone or to view photos on a CD ROM (to simulate the type of photos that would be viewed by email on a computer). | The control group had access to the case histories only |
|
| Cluster RCT; | 1,874 patients documented by 29 nurses enrolled in a masters program. Mean age: Control = 47.16 y (SD: 16.95), 42.5% male; Intervention = 47.8 y (SD: 17.88), 41.5% male | To compare the proportion of obesity-related diagnoses in clinical encounters documented by nurses using a PDA-based log with and without obesity decision support features. | The intervention group had on their PDAs a clinical decision support system for obesity management. On the basis of the results of screening, the clinical decision support system generates an obesity-related diagnosis, and nurses documented the patients' weight management goal. | The control group filled in a clinical log that supports entering of height and weight, selection of an obesity related diagnoses from a pick-list of diagnoses for “weight-related condition”; and selection of plan of care items from pick-lists. |
|
| Cluster RCT; | 1,662 patients between 3 and 18 y of age being seen for a well visit were eligible for the study | To determine if (a) clinic staff will accept and use new interventions for BP screening in children and (b) if simple in-office interventions such as an abridged normative BP table in the medical record or provision of a BP percentile as part of the vital signs can improve physician recognition of abnormally high BP. | All 3 study groups (2 intervention, 1 control) followed the same standard of having a nurse/medical assistant take and record a seated BP measurement at the beginning of all well visits starting at age 3 y. BP Group: This group used a condensed version of the current normative BP tables. The condensed chart was printed on 4×6-in self-adhesive labels. Those responsible for checking inpatients were instructed to add a gender-specific BP sticker in the upper LH corner of the patient's growth chart prior to giving the record to the physician. PDA Group: This group used a PDA application that calculated a BP percentile or percentile range for each BP value entered. The PDA application allowed the nurse/medical assistant to enter the patient's age, gender, height, weight, and BPs. Information was printed on a receipt that was attached to the examination form in the medical record. | The control group received no intervention; clinicians continued their preferred individual practice. |
|
| Non-randomised parallel group trial; | 16 nursing coordinators | To demonstrate the viability and value of implementing a cardiac decision support tool on PDAs to deliver standardized care to cardiac patients using a human factors approach to the design. | The intervention was a decision support tool on a PDA for cardiac tele-triage/tele-consultation. In the intervention group, NCs used the tele-form on the PDA when they received chest pain calls from patients over the 3-mo period. Duration: 3 mo | In the control group NCs used the paper-based teleform when they received chest pain calls from patients. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 79 patients, not pregnant, aged 18 y or older, and able to provide informed consent. Control = 75% male; Intervention = 50% male. | To examine whether Palm Prevention improved adherence to five preventive measures in primary care. | Palm Prevention uses patient characteristics to filter a collection of preventive guidelines and to show only the guidelines that are relevant to that patient. A physician selects a patient's age, sex, and appropriate risk factors. Tapping recommendations shows a list of applicable reminders from the software's database. | Physicians documented all preventive measures performed or discussed during the patient visit in the usual way. |
|
| Crossover RCT; | 42 nurses | To compare the speed and accuracy of charting the weighted value attributed to each vital sign, and of calculating an EWS, using the traditional pen and paper method with that using the PDA. We also assessed nurses' preference for each system. | The hospital has developed a system for direct input of vital signs data into handheld PDAs, linked via Wi-Fi to a central computer. In the intervention arm EWS report was filled in and calculated using a PDA. | In the control arm the nurse would need to know or consult EWS weightings. |
|
| Cluster RCT; | 20 physicians in emergency departments looking at outpatients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism. | To assess the effectiveness of a handheld clinical decision-support system to improve the diagnostic work-up of suspected pulmonary embolism among patients in the emergency department. | Physicians in the intervention group had a CDSS activated in their handheld devices during the intervention period. A physician who uses the program is first asked for the clinical variables necessary to generate a revised Geneva score that predicts the probability of pulmonary embolism. Duration: 7 mo | Physicians in the control groups used posters and pocket cards that showed validated diagnostic strategies |
|
| Crossover RCT; | 60 emergency medical residents or attendees a level 1 American College of surgeons-verified trauma centre or one of their patients. | To determine whether (1) patients accept EPs use of PDAs (2) EPs access PDAs or paper resources (either pocket or comprehensive textbooks) more frequently, (3) access time to electronic and pocket paper references differ, and (4) EPs with PDAs change patient diagnosis, drug therapy, or disposition more often than EPs with paper resources. | The intervention was a Handera 330 PDA that was preloaded with: pharmacopeia's, a general disease text, an infectious disease drug guide, and a medical calculator. Duration: 4 mo | In the control segment of the study residents carried text versions of the Tarascon Pharmacopeia and the Sanford Guide to Antimicrobial Therapy in their pockets. Text versions of Five Minute EM Consult and standard comprehensive EM texts were available. |
|
| Crossover RCT; | 62 volunteers from fire and rescue and first responder organisations | To test the feasibility of automated handheld computer triage and compare it to written triage | 8 disaster scenarios were created with table-2-captiona range of complexity. Participants in the intervention group used the PDA program, TriageDoc, table-2-caption which was developed to accommodate different triage methods from basic tag colour to RTS, TS, and elapsed time. From this basic input data, Glasgow Coma Score, RTS, and TS are calculated and the entry is time stamped ready for the next patient to be triaged. | Control participants manually documented the scenario. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 30 pathology residents (first through fifth year) or post-sophomore fellows. | To test if a PDA-based knowledgebase of surgical pathology report content recommendations improved report completeness. | The 15 experimental group and 13 control group residents were given microscope slides and corresponding reports with the final diagnosis section blanked-out, and were asked to complete the final diagnosis section during 3 study episodes (T0, T1, and T2). T0 and T2, neither group was allowed to use the knowledgebase; T1, experimental group was allowed to use the knowledgebase. | Pathology residents in the control arm, were provided a microscope, and unique surgical pathology “cases” each consisting of microscope slides and partially completed report templates, and were asked to complete the reports |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 49 junior medical students with no previous procedural experience. Mean age: Control = 26.1 y (SD 1.9), Intervention = 26.2 y (SD 1.7). Males: Control = 72%, Intervention = 75% | To determine if mobile VT could be used to facilitate an emergency method of instruction for the accurate performance of needle thoracocentesis. | All participants were given a 45-min lecture on the normal anatomy of the thorax, the pathophysiology and diagnosis of a pneumothorax, and needle thoracocentesis as treatment. The students were presented with a simulated scenario and a manikin involving a traumatic tension pneumothorax and were asked to perform needle thoracocentesis on the manikin. The intervention group performed the procedure under the guidance of VT, and could obtain standardized instructions from experienced emergency physicians on a real-time basis. | The control group performed the procedure without VT-aided instruction. |
BP, blood pressure; CADM, computer assisted decision making; CDSS, clinical decision support system; EP, emergency physician; EWS, early warning score; ICU, intensive care unit; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug; RCT, randomized controlled trial; RTS, revised trauma score; SD, standard deviation; TS, trauma score; VT, video telephony.
Interventions applied for communication to or between health care providers.
| Study | Study Design, Country, Device, Media | Participants | Aims | Intervention | Comparator |
|
| Diagnosis validation; | Clinical staff with varying experience looked at 720 single, non- or minimally displaced fracture images. | To investigate the accuracy and usefulness of teleconsultation using the mobile phone MMS in emergency orthopaedic patients. | Digital X-ray images were sent via MMS to another mobile phone. The display size was 36–42 mm, magnification or adjustment of the image was not possible due to limitations of the mobile phone. Brief information regarding the history of the injury together with basic demographic data, including the age of each patient and data regarding important physical examination of each case was given. The assessors determined whether each case had a fracture or not, including the location of the fracture, and decided on the definitive treatment. Control = 91.2% male; intervention = 96.25% male. | Both clinical and radiographic follow-up data was used as a gold standard. |
|
| Prospective case controlled series; | 14 randomly selected patients who underwent emergency ear, nose and throat procedures over a 1-mo period. | To determine the accuracy of assessment of common ENT emergency radiological investigations using mobile phone digital images. | CT scans and X-ray images taken from and transmitted via a mobile phone via MMS to another phone of the same make and model. Received images were shown sequentially to senior members of the otolaryngology department, including six consultants and five specialist registrars. A senior doctor off site in another hospital and the resident doctor on-site gave a brief history and transmitted the selected images via the mobile phone. | Usual care. The same X-ray films were examined using an X-ray box. |
|
| Crossover RCT; | 46 surgical residents who had completed an endoscopy rotation. | To determine whether the images transmitted wirelessly to a handheld computer are adequate to allow a physician to accurately identify the anatomy and thus allow a surgeon to potentially telementor during an on-going procedure on the basis of these images. | Two previously recorded endoscopic procedures were used. Each participant was first assigned to a viewing device, standard screen or handheld computer, and to a video, tape 1, or tape 2. Each participant was given a ten question quiz to be completed while viewing the corresponding Tape. Both videos contained ten anatomical landmarks marked by a black arrow and a number (1–10), which corresponded to a 5-option MCQ asking for the name of the highlighted structure. Participants were allowed to pause the tape while answering each question. | Standard screen view of the video was used as the control in this intervention. |
|
| Non-randomized parallel group trial; | 120 digital complete amputation patients. | To evaluate the feasibility of clinical application of the camera-phone for remote diagnosis and recommendations about replantation potential in those cases presenting with complete digital amputation. | 35 patients with 60 digital complete amputations were admitted to the ER. The picture of the amputated part and stump of the injured digit(s) was transmitted to another camera-phone held by the remote consultant surgeon, to be reviewed on the display screen. Next, a brief medical and trauma history of each patient was relayed by mobile phone, with further discussion to clarify the condition. Duration: 10 mo | The consultant surgeon visited and reviewed all of these patients and completed the same standard wound questionnaire after on-site inspection. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | Selected orthopaedic residents, attendees, and orthopaedic floor nurses. | To compare floor nurse and intraoperative surgeon communication (nurse to surgeon, and surgeon to nurse). | Cellular communication using a blue-tooth wireless earpiece was used instead of the usual, indirect form of pager communication used between floor nurses and surgeons during surgery to assess for improved communication times. | Usual procedure of contacting the surgeon during surgery: the floor nurse contacted the operating room by pager; this was picked up by circulating nurse and communication proceeded between floor nurse, circulating nurse, and surgeon whilst the surgeon was operating. |
|
| Non-randomised cross-over study; | 30 cardiologists | To compare the intra-observer agreement of physicians' interpretations of 12-lead ECGs on traditional thermal paper to interpretations made from the LCD screens of hand-held computers. | The study participants were information including an answer sheet of 39 different ECG diagnoses and a HP Palmtop computer containing 20 sample ECGs. The participants were instructed to select a diagnosis from the answer sheet and given no restrictions as to the number of times that a certain answer could be used. The participants indicated their diagnoses for all 20 sample ECGs and returned their answer sheets. | 1 mo after receipt of the LCD-displayed ECG interpretations, the same 20 ECGs were sent in printed hard copy form to each participant. The participants entered their diagnoses on the answer sheet and then returned both ECGs and answer sheet to the Lab. |
|
| Non-randomized parallel group trial; | 42 scans that had been taken to exclude inter-cranial haemorrhage in patients following acute trauma. | To assess the feasibility of using a PDA as a medium for the interpretation of cranial CT scans of trauma patients. | 21 complete CT scans were saved by a radiologist onto the hard drive of a computer; all had previously been obtained to exclude inter-cranial haemorrhage following acute trauma. The studies on the PDA were separately evaluated by a radiologist and a neurosurgeon, assessed for image quality as well as intracranial haemorrhage. | Cranial CT scans had been interpreted by a board-certified radiologist prior to the study |
CT, computerized tomography; ENT, ear nose and throat; ER, emergency room; LCD, liquid crystal display; MCQ, multiple choice questionnaire; RCT, randomized controlled trial.
Interventions applied for health services support: appointment reminders.
| Study | Study Design, Country, Device, Media | Participants | Aims | Intervention | Comparator |
|
| Non-randomised parallel group trial; | 301 patients with appointments an orthodontic clinic. | The aim of this study was to retest the hypotheses of Reekie
and Devlin (1998) | Patients received a reminder text (intervention 2) or telephone call (intervention 1), 1 d before the appointment. Duration: 3 wk. | No reminder, reminder phone call, and a reminder letter (mail). |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 1,859 people with scheduled appointments at the health promotion centre of Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang that fell during the study period. Mean age: control (no reminders) = 51.14 y (range = 39.22–63.06), (telephone reminder) = 50.52 y (range = 38.99–62.05); intervention = 50.01 y (range = 39.02–61.0). | To compare the efficacy of a SMS text messaging and phone reminder to improve attendance rates at a health promotion centre. | A reminder was sent to both SMS and telephone groups 72 h prior to the appointment. The reminder was similar in content including participant's name and appointment details. Duration: 2 mo. | No reminder. |
|
| Non-randomised parallel group trial; | Patients attending outpatient clinics that were KATU clients and used their SMS appointment reminder system (29,014 appointments) | To study the impact of appointment reminders sent as SMS text messages to patients' cell phones on nonattendance rates. | Data on SMS appointment reminders sent and also about attendance and nonattendance at scheduled appointments were obtained. Duration: 11 mo. | No reminder. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 418 patients who failed to attend two or more routine doctor or nurse appointments in the preceding 12 mo and made an appointment during the study time. Mean age: control = 33.1 y (SD = 9.8); intervention = 33.1 y (SD = 10). | To evaluate the effectiveness of texting appointment reminders to patients who persistently fail to attend appointments. | The intervention comprised a text message reminder of the appointment sent between 8:00 and 9:00 on the morning preceding afternoon appointments and between 16:00 and 17:00 on the afternoon preceding morning appointments. Duration: 6–7 mo | No reminder. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 31 repeat blood donors. | To study the effectiveness of text message reminders versus usual phone reminders on donor show rates with scheduled donation appointments. | Donors received a text message reminder of a scheduled appointment with the blood donation clinic. Duration: 7 d | Usual phone reminders. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 993 patients with time-appropriate appointments and who had (or their caregivers) a mobile phone with text messaging function. Mean age: Control = 37.8 y; intervention (mobile phone call) = 38.4 y (SMS reminder) = 38.4. | To determine the effectiveness of a text messaging reminder in improving attendance in primary care. | In both intervention groups, a reminder was sent using a mobile phone 24 to 48 h prior to the appointment. The text messaging and mobile phone messages consisted of patient's name and appointment time. The mobile phone conversation was similar to the text messaging reminder message and no clinical or laboratory information was included. Duration: 6 mo. | No reminder. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 931 participants registered with the clinics for at least 6 mo who had at least one chronic disease, a return appointment between 1 and 6 mo and ownership of a mobile phone. Mean age: control (no reminder) = 60.77 y, (telephone call) = 57.73 y; intervention (text reminder) = 58.19 y. | To determine if text messaging would be effective in reducing non-attendance in patients on long-term follow-up, compared with telephone reminders and no reminder. | Reminders were sent to the participants 24–48 h before the scheduled appointment. To avoid caller bias during telephone conversations, a research assistant was trained to deliver the same telephone message as in the telephone reminder. | No reminder or a telephone call delivered in a standard way by a trained research assistant. |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | 16,400 patients with an appointment booked in Yorkhill Hospital in either Aug or Sept 2004. | To assess DNA rates for those receiving SMS reminders and those who didn't receive SMS reminders. | Patients are contacted one working day prior to the appointment date and the same message is sent to all patients, being “this is a reminder of an appointment at Yorkhill on DATE and TIME. For enquiries or to cancel please call XXX.” Duration: 2 mo. | No reminder. |
DNA, did not attend; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SD, standard deviation.
Interventions applied for health services support: test result notification.
| Study | Study Design, Country, Device, Media | Participants | Aims | Intervention | Comparator |
|
| Parallel group RCT; | Pregnant women attending the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan, who could speak Chinese and who agreed to undergo Down Syndrome screening. | To study the effect of fast reporting by mobile phone SMS on anxiety levels in women undergoing prenatal biochemical screening for Down Syndrome. | Pregnant women were given appointments for regular clinical follow-up after serum testing for Down Syndrome. If the serum screening results were negative, group A were sent a pre-clinic SMS. | Group B were not offered fast reporting |
|
| Concurrent Cohort Study; | 78 patients with a diagnosis of untreated genital CT infection. Mean age: Control = 27.2 y (SD 8.6), 95.2% female; intervention = 24.8 y (SD 3.9), 96.4% female. | To assess the effectiveness of a text message result service within an inner London sexual health clinic. | Patients with a diagnosis of untreated genital CT who were sent a text message and compared to patients with untreated CT recalled by standard methods. Texts were one of the following 3: “all of your results are negative,” “please ring the clinic,” “please come back to the clinic.” | Usual care: patients were asked to return to the clinic, or phone the clinic for results. |
RCT, randomized controlled trial.
Cochrane risk of bias summary for health care provider support trials.
| Trial | Sequence Generation | Allocation Concealment | Blinding | Incomplete Outcome Data | Selective Outcome Reporting Bias | Contamination | Other Bias |
|
| |||||||
| Farrell 2008 | U | U | L | H | L | L | U |
| Mcleod 2009 | L | U | L | L | L | L | H |
| Mcleod 2006 | U | U | U | U | H | U | U |
| Goldsworthy 2006 | L | L | L | H | L | L | L |
| Leung 2003 | L | L | U | L | L | L | L |
| Strayer 2010 | U | U | L | U | H | L | L |
| Tempelhof 2009 | L | L | L | L | L | U | U |
|
| |||||||
| Berner 2006 | L | U | L | L | L | L | L |
| Bürkle 2008 | L | U | H | U | L | L | L |
| Coopmans 2008 | L | U | U | L | L | L | H |
| Greenfield 2007 | H | H | U | L | L | U | H |
| Greiver 2005 | L | U | U | H | L | L | L |
| Jayaraman 2008 | L | U | U | L | L | L | U |
| Lee 2009 | U | U | U | U | L | U | L |
| Mclaughlin 2010 | U | U | U | U | L | L | U |
| Momtahan 2007 | H | H | U | U | L | U | H |
| Price 2005 | L | U | H | L | L | L | L |
| Prytherch 2006 | U | U | U | L | L | L | L |
| Roy 2009 | L | L | L | U | L | L | L |
| Rudkin 2006 | H | H | U | L | L | U | L |
| Schell 2006 | U | U | U | L | L | L | L |
| Skeate 2007 | U | U | U | H | L | L | L |
| You 2009 | L | U | U | L | L | L | L |
|
| |||||||
| Blaivas 2005 | H | H | H | L | L | L | H |
| Chandhanayingyong 2007 | H | H | L | U | L | U | L |
| Gandsas 2004 | U | U | U | U | L | U | L |
| Hsieh 2005 | H | H | H | L | L | L | L |
| Mclaughlin 2010 | U | U | U | U | L | L | U |
| Ortega 2009 | U | U | U | U | L | L | H |
| Pettis 1999 | H | H | U | L | L | U | L |
| Vaisanen 2003 | H | U | U | L | L | L | U |
| Yaghmai 2003 | H | H | L | L | L | U | U |
L, low; H, high; U, unclear.
Figure 2Cochrane summary risk of bias for trials of health care provider support interventions (n = 32).
Cochrane risk of bias summary for health service support trials.
| Trial | Sequence Generation | Allocation Concealment | Blinding | Incomplete Outcome Data | Selective Outcome Reporting Bias | Contamination | Other Bias |
|
| |||||||
| Bos 2005 | H | U | L | L | H | L | L |
| Chen 2008 | L | U | L | L | L | L | U |
| Da Costa 2010 | H | H | H | U | L | L | U |
| Fairhurst 2008 | L | L | L | L | L | L | H |
| Fung 2009 | H | H | H | U | U | U | U |
| Leong 2006 | L | U | L | L | L | L | U |
| Liew 2009 | L | L | L | U | L | L | U |
| Milne 2009 | L | U | L | L | L | L | L |
|
| |||||||
| Cheng 2008 | L | U | U | U | L | L | L |
| Menon-Johansson 2006 | H | H | U | L | L | L | H |
L, low; H, high; U, unclear.
Figure 3Cochrane summary risk of bias for trials of health services support (n = 10).
Effect estimates for trials of medical education interventions.
| Trial | Intervention | Outcome | RR | MD | LCI | UCI |
|
| ||||||
| Mcleod 2009 | PDA assessment tool versus PDA without tool | Tabulation of geriatric functional issues on dismissal summaries | 0.98 | — | 0.62 | 1.54 |
| Mcleod 2009 | PDA assessment tool versus no device | Tabulation of geriatric functional issues on dismissal summaries | 0.96 | — | 0.65 | 1.43 |
| Tempelhof 2009 | Conference talks on MP3/MP4 versus attendance at conference | Conference 1 MCQ correct | 1.07 | — | 0.39 | 2.92 |
| Tempelhof 2009 | Conference talks on MP3/MP4 versus attendance at conference | Conference 2 MCQ correct | 1.07 | — | 0.66 | 1.74 |
| Tempelhof 2009 | Conference talks on MP3/MP4 versus attendance at conference | Conference 3 MCQ correct | 1.19 | — | 0.70 | 2.02 |
| Tempelhof 2009 | Conference talks on MP3/MP4 versus attendance at conference | Conference 4 MCQ correct | 1.07 | — | 0.66 | 1.74 |
| Tempelhof 2009 | Conference talks on MP3/MP4 versus attendance at conference | Conference 5 MCQ correct | 0.95 | — | 0.52 | 1.76 |
| Tempelhof 2009 | Conference talks on MP3/MP4 versus attendance at conference | Overall MCQ correct | 1.07 | — | 0.61 | 1.89 |
| Goldsworthy 2006 | PDA loaded with clinical reference material versus manual access to material | Test score (medical education) | — | 3.14 | 0.73 | 5.56 |
| Mcleod 2009 | PDA assessment tool versus no device | Test score (no device versus PDA) | — | 0.23 | −0.65 | 1.11 |
| Mcleod 2009 | PDA assessment tool versus no device | Test score (PDA without tool versus PDA) | — | 0.05 | −0.97 | 1.07 |
LCI, lower confidence interval; MCQ, multiple choice questionnaire; MD, mean deviation; UCI, upper confidence interval.
Effect estimates for trials of interventions to facilitate communication between health care professionals for clinical/patient management.
| Trial | Intervention | Outcome | RR | MD | LCI | UCI |
| Chandhanayingyong 2007 | Photo of X-ray on mobile phone versus gold standard | Fracture detection | 0.79 | — | 0.76 | 0.82 |
| Hsieh 2005 | Photo of amputation injury on mobile phone versus gold standard | Correct assessment of potential to perform re-implantation | 0.90 | — | 0.82 | 0.99 |
| Hsieh 2005 | Photo of amputation injury on mobile phone versus gold standard | Recognition of skin ecchymoses | 0.79 | — | 0.69 | 0.90 |
| Ortega 2009 | Mobile call between nurse and surgeon versus usual practice | Nurse - Surgeon: Call refusal or delay | 0.14 | — | 0.01 | 2.65 |
| Ortega 2009 | Mobile call between nurse and surgeon versus usual practice | Nurse - Surgeon: intra-operative case interruption. | 0.05 | — | 0.00 | 0.87 |
| Ortega 2009 | Mobile call between nurse and surgeon versus usual practice | Nurse - Surgeon: Communication difficulties | 0.14 | — | 0.01 | 2.65 |
| Ortega 2009 | Mobile call between nurse and surgeon versus usual practice | Nurse - Surgeon: Intra-operative noise interference | 0.20 | — | 0.01 | 4.00 |
| Ortega 2009 | Mobile call between nurse and surgeon versus usual practice | Nurse - Surgeon: response rate | 1.42 | — | 1.12 | 1.80 |
| Ortega 2009 | Mobile call between surgeon and nurse versus usual practice | Surgeon - Nurse: response rate | 1.03 | — | 0.94 | 1.13 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone usual procedure | Transmission times: transmission from fax via satellite | 0.17 | — | 0.04 | 0.30 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone usual procedure | Transmission times: transmission from table fax. | 0.02 | — | −0.15 | 0.19 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone usual procedure | Transmission times: transmission from monitor defibrillator. | −0.02 | — | −0.27 | 0.23 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone usual procedure | Transmission times: transmission from mobile fax and phone. | 1.20 | — | −0.36 | 2.76 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone usual procedure | Quality of transmitted ECG: transmission from fax via satellite | −0.10 | — | −0.36 | 0.16 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone usual procedure | Quality of transmitted ECG: transmission from table fax. | −0.30 | — | −0.73 | 0.13 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone usual procedure | Quality of transmitted ECG: transmission from mobile fax and phone. | −0.10 | — | −0.53 | 0.33 |
| Vaisanen 2003 | Fax transmitted via mobile phone | Proportion of failed attempts during ECG transmission | 1.00 | — | 0.07 | 14.79 |
| Yaghmai 2003 | Photo of CT scan on PDA versus gold standard | Diagnosis: percentage positive | 0.91 | — | 0.77 | 1.07 |
| Gandsas 2004 | Recording of surgery on handheld computer versus standard screen | Score: test on video of two standard surgical procedures | — | −3.4 | −10.3 | 3.5 |
LCI, lower confidence interval; MD, mean deviation; UCI, upper confidence interval.
Effect estimates for trials of clinical diagnosis and management support: appropriate management outcomes (testing, referrals, screening, diagnosis, treatment, or triage).
| Trial | Intervention | Outcome | RR | MD | LCI | UCI |
| Griever 2005 | PDA software diagnosis aid versus no device | Appropriateness of referral for cardiac stress testing | 1.61 | — | 0.81 | 3.18 |
| Griever 2005 | PDA software diagnosis aid versus no device | Appropriateness of referral for nuclear cardiology testing after cardiac stress testing. | 1.45 | — | 0.88 | 2.38 |
| Griever 2005 | PDA software diagnosis aid versus no device | Proportion referred to cardiologist | 0.96 | — | 0.52 | 1.79 |
| Griever 2005 | PDA software diagnosis aid versus no device | Proportion of participants referred for cardiac stress tests | 1.57 | — | 1.04 | 2.36 |
| Lee 2009 | CDSS on PDA - obesity-related diagnoses versus paper resource | Encounters with missed obesity related diagnosis | 0.37 | — | 0.30 | 0.45 |
| Lee 2009 | CDSS on PDA - obesity-related diagnoses versus paper resource | Encounters with obesity related diagnosis | 12.49 | — | 6.34 | 24.62 |
| Price 2005 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Proportion of patients eligible for hypertension screen that received it | 0.98 | — | 0.87 | 1.09 |
| Price 2005 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Proportion of patients eligible for lipid disorder screen that received it | 1.50 | — | 1.16 | 1.96 |
| Price 2005 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Proportion of patients eligible for pap test that received it | 1.15 | — | 1.01 | 1.30 |
| Price 2005 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Proportion of patients eligible for prophylactic use of acetylsalicylic acid that received it | 2.60 | — | 1.58 | 4.27 |
| Price 2005 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Proportion of patients eligible for colorectal cancer screen that received it | 1.81 | — | 1.12 | 2.92 |
| Prytherch 2006 | Clinical chart on PDA versus no device | Incorrect clinical actions (based on recording of vital signs and calculation of early warning scores) | 0.14 | — | 0.01 | 2.61 |
| Roy 2009 | CDSS on handheld computer versus no device | Appropriate diagnostic work-up | 2.50 | — | 0.63 | 10.00 |
| Rudkin 2006 | PDA loaded with clinical guides versus no device | Change in diagnosis, treatment of disposition management (excluding drugs) | 2.00 | — | 0.19 | 20.90 |
| Rudkin 2006 | PDA loaded with clinical guides versus no device | Change in drug (interaction, dose, cost, indication) choice | 2.00 | — | 0.55 | 7.27 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Correct identification of critical patients using triage score: Fire | — | 0.60 | −1.07 | 2.27 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Correct identification of critical patients using triage score: MVA | — | −0.70 | −2.10 | 0.70 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Correct identification of critical patients using triage score: Practice | — | 4.30 | 2.51 | 6.09 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Correct identification of critical patients using triage score: Total score | — | 5.30 | −0.27 | 10.87 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Correct identification of critical patients using triage score: mass casualty index score | — | 1.10 | −2.08 | 4.28 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Triage time: Fire | — | 0.60 | −0.08 | 1.28 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Triage time: MVA | — | −0.80 | −1.53 | −0.07 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Triage time: Practice | — | −1.00 | −1.96 | −0.04 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Triage time: Total score | — | −3.20 | −5.27 | −1.13 |
| Schell 2006 | Automated versus manual computer triage | Triage time: mass casualty index | — | −1.90 | −3.00 | −0.80 |
LCI, lower confidence interval; MVA, motor vehicle accident; UCI, upper confidence interval.
Effect estimates for trials of clinical diagnosis and management support: medical process outcomes.
| Clinical Trial | Intervention | Outcome | RR | MD | LCI | UCI |
| Prytherch 2006 | Clinical chart on PDA versus no device | Error in calculation of early warning score (incorrect data) | 0.20 | — | 0.03 | 1.57 |
| Prytherch 2006 | Clinical chart on PDA versus no device | Error in calculation of early warning score (missing data) | 3.00 | — | 0.13 | 69.70 |
| Prytherch 2006 | Clinical chart on PDA versus no device | Errors in report (incorrect data) | 0.33 | — | 0.01 | 7.74 |
| Prytherch 2006 | Clinical chart on PDA versus no device | Errors in report (missing data) | 0.33 | — | 0.01 | 7.74 |
| Rudkin 2006 | PDA loaded with clinical guides versus no device | Percent use of clinical guide - emergency medicine | 1.04 | — | 0.89 | 1.21 |
| Skeate 2007 | PDA knowledgebase versus no device | Diagnosis reports felt to be complete, but were not at 48 h follow-up test (T2) | 0.58 | — | 0.35 | 0.95 |
| Skeate 2007 | PDA knowledgebase versus no device | Diagnosis reports felt to be complete, but were not at 48 h follow-up test (T1) | 0.69 | — | 0.40 | 1.21 |
| Coopmans 2008 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Case 1: Mean time to correct diagnosis | — | 7.85 | 2.14 | 13.56 |
| Coopmans 2008 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Case 1: Mean time to recognize abnormal event | — | 0.65 | −0.01 | 1.31 |
| Coopmans 2008 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Case 1: Mean time to definitive treatment | — | 8.00 | 1.14 | 14.86 |
| Coopmans 2008 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Case 2: First indicates correct diagnosis | — | −16.58 | −27.66 | −5.50 |
| Coopmans 2008 | CDSS on PDA versus no device | Case 2: Mean time to definitive treatment. | — | −17.31 | −21.23 | −13.39 |
| Prytherch 2006 | Clinical chart on PDA versus no device | Completion time for report of vital signs including calculation of early warning score. | — | −24.60 | −42.74 | −6.46 |
| Skeate 2007 | PDA knowledgebase versus no device | Time spent completing a diagnosis report | — | 185.50 | −626.72 | 997.72 |
| Skeate 2007 | PDA knowledgebase versus no device | Time spent completing a diagnosis report at 48 h follow-up test | — | 6.50 | −721.75 | 734.75 |
| You 2009 | Video telephony for medical procedure versus no device | Difficulty in performing needle thoracocentesis | — | −2.30 | −3.15 | −1.45 |
| You 2009 | Video telephony for medical procedure versus no device | Time to success: needle thoracocentesis performance | 18.20 | — | 5.63 | 5.63 |
LCI, lower confidence interval; MD, mean deviation; UCI, upper confidence interval.
Figure 4Forest plots of the effect of SMS reminders on appointments.
Effect estimates for health service support trials.
| Trial | Intervention | Outcome | RR | MD | LCI | UCI |
|
| ||||||
| Bos 2005 | SMS versus mail reminder | Cancelled appointments | 2.67 | — | 0.92 | 7.71 |
| Bos 2005 | SMS reminder versus phone call | Cancelled appointments | 2.31 | — | 0.90 | 5.95 |
| Leong 2006 | Mobile phone call versus no reminder | Appointment attendance | 1.24 | — | 1.07 | 1.43 |
|
| ||||||
| Menon-Johansson 2006 | SMS notification of test results versus no SMS | Mean time to communication of diagnosis | — | −5 | −6.94 | −2.26 |
| Menon-Johansson 2006 | SMS notification of test results versus no SMS | Mean time from first contact to treatment | — | 0 | −0.44 | 0.44 |
| Menon-Johansson 2006 | SMS notification of test results versus no SMS | Mean time from test to treatment | — | −6 | −7.15 | −4.85 |
LCI, lower confidence interval; MD, mean deviation; UCI, upper confidence interval.