Mohammad H Mobasheri1, Maximilian Johnston2, Usama M Syed3, Dominic King2, Ara Darzi2. 1. Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK. Electronic address: m.mobasheri@imperial.ac.uk. 2. Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK. 3. Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Smartphones and tablet devices have become ubiquitous, and their adoption in the health care arena is growing. Reviews have looked at their utilities within medical specialties. Despite the many surgical apps available currently, there has not been a comprehensive literature review evaluating uses of these platforms within surgical disciplines. We reviewed the literature systematically in this regard. METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, Health Management Informatics Consortium, and PsychINFO databases were searched for empiric quantitative studies evaluating interventions based in the use of smartphone or tablet device within surgical disciplines targeted at surgeons, patients, or the wider public. RESULTS: Of the 39 studies included, 24 evaluated smartphone-based interventions and 15 looked at tablet devices, whereas 30 were app-based interventions and 9 were not. A wide range of effective and innovative utilities were identified and categorized into 8 domains; Diagnostics (n = 11), telemedicine (n = 9), operative navigation (n = 6), training (n = 5), data collection (n = 3), patient education (n = 2), behavior change (n = 2), and operative planning (n = 1). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive systematic literature review of smartphone and tablet device use in surgery demonstrates a wide range of innovative utilities in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative contexts. Although results of individual studies generally were favorable, limitations in methodologies existed in many, and although studies clearly highlight the substantial potential of smartphone and tablet devices in the surgical setting, trials of greater quality will be necessary to pave the way for their widespread adoption.
BACKGROUND: Smartphones and tablet devices have become ubiquitous, and their adoption in the health care arena is growing. Reviews have looked at their utilities within medical specialties. Despite the many surgical apps available currently, there has not been a comprehensive literature review evaluating uses of these platforms within surgical disciplines. We reviewed the literature systematically in this regard. METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, Health Management Informatics Consortium, and PsychINFO databases were searched for empiric quantitative studies evaluating interventions based in the use of smartphone or tablet device within surgical disciplines targeted at surgeons, patients, or the wider public. RESULTS: Of the 39 studies included, 24 evaluated smartphone-based interventions and 15 looked at tablet devices, whereas 30 were app-based interventions and 9 were not. A wide range of effective and innovative utilities were identified and categorized into 8 domains; Diagnostics (n = 11), telemedicine (n = 9), operative navigation (n = 6), training (n = 5), data collection (n = 3), patient education (n = 2), behavior change (n = 2), and operative planning (n = 1). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive systematic literature review of smartphone and tablet device use in surgery demonstrates a wide range of innovative utilities in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative contexts. Although results of individual studies generally were favorable, limitations in methodologies existed in many, and although studies clearly highlight the substantial potential of smartphone and tablet devices in the surgical setting, trials of greater quality will be necessary to pave the way for their widespread adoption.
Authors: Rebecca L Gunter; Skyler Chouinard; Sara Fernandes-Taylor; Jason T Wiseman; Sam Clarkson; Kyla Bennett; Caprice C Greenberg; K Craig Kent Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Rony Takchi; Gregory A Williams; David Brauer; Tina Stoentcheva; Crystal Wolf; Brooke Van Anne; Cheryl Woolsey; William G Hawkins Journal: Am Surg Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 1.002