AIM: Does phone multimedia messages (MMS) to families of Indigenous children with tympanic membrane perforation (TMP): (i) increase clinic attendance; (ii) improve ear health; and (iii) provide a culturally appropriate method of health promotion? METHODS:Fifty-three Australian Aboriginal children with a TMP living in remote community households with a mobile phone were randomised into intervention (n = 30) and control (n = 23) groups. MMS health messages in local languages were sent to the intervention group over 6 weeks. PRIMARY OUTCOME: there was no significant difference in clinic attendance, with 1.3 clinic visits per child in both groups (mean difference -0.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.1, 0.9; P = 0.9). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: (i) there was no significant change in healed perforation (risk difference 6%; 95% CI -10, 20; P = 0.6), middle ear discharge (risk difference -1%; 95% CI -30, 30; P = 1.0) or perforation size (mean difference 3%; 95% CI -11, 17; P = 0.7) between the groups; (ii) 84% (95% CI 60, 90) in the control and 70% (95% CI 50, 80) in the intervention group were happy to receive MMS health messages in the future. The difference was not significant (risk difference -14%; 95% CI -37, 8; P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was no improvement in clinic attendance or ear health, this randomised controlled trial of MMS in Indigenous languages demonstrated that MMS is a culturally appropriate form of health promotion. Mobile phones may enhance management of chronic disease in remote and disadvantaged populations.
RCT Entities:
AIM: Does phone multimedia messages (MMS) to families of Indigenous children with tympanic membrane perforation (TMP): (i) increase clinic attendance; (ii) improve ear health; and (iii) provide a culturally appropriate method of health promotion? METHODS: Fifty-three Australian Aboriginal children with a TMP living in remote community households with a mobile phone were randomised into intervention (n = 30) and control (n = 23) groups. MMS health messages in local languages were sent to the intervention group over 6 weeks. PRIMARY OUTCOME: there was no significant difference in clinic attendance, with 1.3 clinic visits per child in both groups (mean difference -0.1; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.1, 0.9; P = 0.9). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: (i) there was no significant change in healed perforation (risk difference 6%; 95% CI -10, 20; P = 0.6), middle ear discharge (risk difference -1%; 95% CI -30, 30; P = 1.0) or perforation size (mean difference 3%; 95% CI -11, 17; P = 0.7) between the groups; (ii) 84% (95% CI 60, 90) in the control and 70% (95% CI 50, 80) in the intervention group were happy to receive MMS health messages in the future. The difference was not significant (risk difference -14%; 95% CI -37, 8; P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: Although there was no improvement in clinic attendance or ear health, this randomised controlled trial of MMS in Indigenous languages demonstrated that MMS is a culturally appropriate form of health promotion. Mobile phones may enhance management of chronic disease in remote and disadvantaged populations.
Authors: Jemima Beissbarth; Heidi C Smith-Vaughan; Allen C Cheng; Peter S Morris; Amanda J Leach Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2022-04-14 Impact factor: 3.418