Chitra Lalloo1, Lindsay A Jibb, Jordan Rivera, Arnav Agarwal, Jennifer N Stinson. 1. *The Hospital for Sick Children, Child Health Evaluative Sciences †Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto Departments of §Anaesthesia ∥Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto ‡Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There are a growing number of pain self-management applications (apps) available for users to download on personal smartphones. The purpose of this study was to critically appraise the content and self-management functionality of currently available pain apps. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted between May and June 2014 of the official stores for the 4 major operating systems. Two authors independently identified patient-focused apps with a stated goal of pain management. Discrepancies regarding selection were resolved through discussion with a third party. Metadata from all included apps were abstracted into a standard form. The content and functionality of each app as it pertained to pain self-management was rated. RESULTS: A total of 279 apps met the inclusion criteria. Pain self-care skill support was the most common self-management function (77.4%). Apps also purported providing patients with the ability to engage in pain education (45.9%), self-monitoring (19%), social support (3.6%), and goal-setting (0.72%). No apps were comprehensive in terms of pain self-management, with the majority of apps including only a single self-management function (58.5%). In addition, only 8.2% of apps included a health care professional in their development, not a single app provided a theoretical rationale, and only 1 app underwent scientific evaluation. DISCUSSION: Currently available pain self-management apps for patients are simplistic, lack the involvement of health care professionals in their development, and have not been rigorously tested for effectiveness on pain-related health outcomes. There is a need to develop and test theoretically and evidence-based apps to better support patients with accessible pain care self-management.
OBJECTIVES: There are a growing number of pain self-management applications (apps) available for users to download on personal smartphones. The purpose of this study was to critically appraise the content and self-management functionality of currently available pain apps. METHODS: An electronic search was conducted between May and June 2014 of the official stores for the 4 major operating systems. Two authors independently identified patient-focused apps with a stated goal of pain management. Discrepancies regarding selection were resolved through discussion with a third party. Metadata from all included apps were abstracted into a standard form. The content and functionality of each app as it pertained to pain self-management was rated. RESULTS: A total of 279 apps met the inclusion criteria. Pain self-care skill support was the most common self-management function (77.4%). Apps also purported providing patients with the ability to engage in pain education (45.9%), self-monitoring (19%), social support (3.6%), and goal-setting (0.72%). No apps were comprehensive in terms of pain self-management, with the majority of apps including only a single self-management function (58.5%). In addition, only 8.2% of apps included a health care professional in their development, not a single app provided a theoretical rationale, and only 1 app underwent scientific evaluation. DISCUSSION: Currently available pain self-management apps for patients are simplistic, lack the involvement of health care professionals in their development, and have not been rigorously tested for effectiveness on pain-related health outcomes. There is a need to develop and test theoretically and evidence-based apps to better support patients with accessible pain care self-management.
Authors: Phil Adams; Elizabeth L Murnane; Michael Elfenbein; Elaine Wethington; Geri Gay Journal: Proc SIGCHI Conf Hum Factor Comput Syst Date: 2017-05
Authors: Patricia A Richardson; Lauren E Harrison; Lauren C Heathcote; Gillian Rush; Deborah Shear; Chitra Lalloo; Korey Hood; Rikard K Wicksell; Jennifer Stinson; Laura E Simons Journal: Expert Rev Neurother Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 4.618
Authors: Alexander T Adams; Phil Adams; Elizabeth L Murnane; Mike Elfenbein; Shruti Sannon; Geri Gay; Tanzeem Choudhury; Pamara F Chang Journal: ACM Trans Appl Percept Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 1.550