Articles

Posted in Abstract, HCSM

Social media use among patients and caregivers [BMJ Open. 2013]

Posted on by Editor

Abstract

To map the state of the existing literature evaluating the use of social media in patient and caregiver populations.

 

Studies reporting primary research on the use of social media (collaborative projects, blogs/microblogs, content communities, social networking sites, virtual worlds) by patients or caregivers.

Two reviewers screened studies for eligibility; one reviewer extracted data from relevant studies and a second performed verification for accuracy and completeness on a 10% sample. Data were analysed to describe which social media tools are being used, by whom, for what purpose and how they are being evaluated.

RESULTS:

Two hundred eighty-four studies were included. Discussion forums were highly prevalent and constitute 66.6% of the sample. Social networking sites (14.8%) and blogs/microblogs (14.1%) were the next most commonly used tools. The intended purpose of the tool was to facilitate self-care in 77.1% of studies. While there were clusters of studies that focused on similar conditions (eg, lifestyle/weight loss (12.7%), cancer (11.3%)), there were no patterns in the objectives or tools used. A large proportion of the studies were descriptive (42.3%); however, there were also 48 (16.9%) randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Among the RCTs, 35.4% reported statistically significant results favouring the social media intervention being evaluated; however, 72.9% presented positive conclusions regarding the use of social media.

CONCLUSIONS:

There is an extensive body of literature examining the use of social media in patient and caregiver populations. Much of this work is descriptive; however, with such widespread use, evaluations of effectiveness are required. In studies that have examined effectiveness, positive conclusions are often reported, despite non-significant findings.

See on www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Posted in HCSM

Community is Not a Buzz Word 

Posted on by Editor

Gail Zahtz writes:

Bring everyone together.  Respect the expertise each has.  Rely on evidence for medical information, training and provider expertise for direction.  Give power to the patient stories- every single one of them.  Provide rated resources so that people can easily find help.  Enable communities that can focus around shared goals, roles, visions and ideals- create the largest center for learning and sharing internationally by empowering people to lead and encouraging them to ask.  Support the trusted relationships that have always been the epicenter of healthcare delivery- the relationship between the physician and patient.  Include the caregivers and the healthcare providers, the students and the scientists, the manufacturers and the non-profits.

We don’t need more technology- we need to use the tool of technology to support community.  And we don’t throw out the “old” supports- the value of books and in-person events.  Communities of Practice have been used for years from medical journals to local government.  Open source technology has proven that vast teams of volunteers can work together towards common goals and real solutions.  This is neither new nor rocket science… or so I thought……

Read this in full on blog.gailzahtz.com

Posted in Abstract, mHealth

Mapping mHealth Research: A Decade of Evolution

Posted on by Editor

Maddalena Fiordelli, PhD; Nicola Diviani, PhD; Peter J Schulz, PhD

Institute of Communication and Health, Faculty of Communication Sciences, University of Lugano, Lugano, Switzerland

Background:

For the last decade, mHealth has constantly expanded as a part of eHealth. Mobile applications for health have the potential to target heterogeneous audiences and address specific needs in different situations, with diverse outcomes, and to complement highly developed health care technologies. The market is rapidly evolving, making countless new mobile technologies potentially available to the health care system; however, systematic research on the impact of these technologies on health outcomes remains scarce.
Objective: To provide a comprehensive view of the field of mHealth research to date and to understand whether and how the new generation of smartphones has triggered research, since their introduction 5 years ago. Specifically, we focused on studies aiming to evaluate the impact of mobile phones on health, and we sought to identify the main areas of health care delivery where mobile technologies can have an impact.

Methods:

A systematic literature review was conducted on the impact of mobile phones and smartphones in health care. Abstracts and articles were categorized using typologies that were partly adapted from existing literature and partly created inductively from publications included in the review.

Results:

The final sample consisted of 117 articles published between 2002 and 2012. The majority of them were published in the second half of our observation period, with a clear upsurge between 2007 and 2008, when the number of articles almost doubled. The articles were published in 77 different journals, mostly from the field of medicine or technology and medicine. Although the range of health conditions addressed was very wide, a clear focus on chronic conditions was noted. The research methodology of these studies was mostly clinical trials and pilot studies, but new designs were introduced in the second half of our observation period. The size of the samples drawn to test mobile health applications also increased over time. The majority of the studies tested basic mobile phone features (eg, text messaging), while only a few assessed the impact of smartphone apps. Regarding the investigated outcomes, we observed a shift from assessment of the technology itself to assessment of its impact. The outcome measures used in the studies were mostly clinical, including both self-reported and objective measures.

Conclusions:

Research interest in mHealth is growing, together with an increasing complexity in research designs and aim specifications, as well as a diversification of the impact areas. However, new opportunities offered by new mobile technologies do not seem to have been explored thus far. Mapping the evolution of the field allows a better understanding of its strengths and weaknesses and can inform future developments.

(J Med Internet Res 2013;15(5):e95)
doi:10.2196/jmir.2430

See on www.jmir.org

Posted in HCSM

Health sites: too complex, and full of cliches

Posted on by Editor

See on Scoop.it – Health Care Social Media Monitor

The importance of health literacy hit home for Lisa Gualtieri when a Cambodian refugee diagnosed with cancer asked her to act as a patient advocate.

 

She played the role of a “salty tongue,” a Cambodian expression that paints outspokenness in a positive light. But even though the patient’s family was in the room when doctors took the time to answer every last question about test results and treatment options, the refugee’s family would call Gualtieri hours later to review what doctors had said.

 

A new study, published Monday in JAMA Internal Medicine, suggests one potential reason for the family’s confusion: Despite good intentions, many experts may be creating educational materials that are too difficult for patients and their families to grasp.

 

“Patients will often come to the office, and one of the first things they say to you, especially about technical information, they’ll say that they’ve been on the Internet, and they’ll quote one or two key phrases back to you,” said study author Dr. Charles Prestigiacomo. “Unfortunately, the little soundbites, while accurate, may not be complete.”

See on uk.reuters.com