Evidence-Based Review of Smartphone Versus Paper Asthma Action Plans on Asthma Control

基于证据的智能手机哮喘行动计划与纸质哮喘行动计划在哮喘控制方面的比较研究

阅读:1

Abstract

Objective: To summarize and evaluate existing literature regarding the impact of mobile asthma action plans (MAAPs) versus written asthma action plans (WAAPs) on degree of asthma control. Data Sources: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (2000-January 2019) using the term asthma action plan with each of the following: smartphone, computers, handheld, mobile applications, portable electronic application, portable software application, tablet, or technology. Study Selection and Data Extraction: The search was limited to cohort and randomized controlled trials examining MAAP versus WAAP data. Data extracted included the following: study design, population, intervention, control, outcomes related to asthma control, and potential biases assessed using Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Data Synthesis: Four of the 41 studies identified were included, each of which were randomized control trials. One study showed significant improvement using a non-asthma-specific assessment tool, 1 study showed improvement only for patients with uncontrolled asthma at baseline, and 2 studies showed no difference in asthma control scores. Overall risk of bias across all studies was low to moderate. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Health care providers should select an asthma action plan (AAP) format based on what the patient is most likely to understand and consistently use. Conclusions: Because of conflicting published data regarding the use of MAAPs versus WAAPs and risk of bias, it is unclear at this time whether one format of AAP is superior to the other for either adolescents or adults.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。