Cargando…

Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND: As mobile devices and apps grow in popularity, they are increasingly being used by health care providers to aid clinical care. At our institution, we developed and implemented a point-of-care clinical photography app that also permitted the capture of video recordings; however, the clini...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cambron, Julia C, Wyatt, Kirk D, Lohse, Christine M, Underwood, Page Y, Hellmich, Thomas R
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6918202/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31793894
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/14919
_version_ 1783480536111513600
author Cambron, Julia C
Wyatt, Kirk D
Lohse, Christine M
Underwood, Page Y
Hellmich, Thomas R
author_facet Cambron, Julia C
Wyatt, Kirk D
Lohse, Christine M
Underwood, Page Y
Hellmich, Thomas R
author_sort Cambron, Julia C
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: As mobile devices and apps grow in popularity, they are increasingly being used by health care providers to aid clinical care. At our institution, we developed and implemented a point-of-care clinical photography app that also permitted the capture of video recordings; however, the clinical findings it was used to capture and the outcomes that resulted following video recording were unclear. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess the use of a mobile clinical video recording app at our institution and its impact on clinical care. METHODS: A single reviewer retrospectively reviewed video recordings captured between April 2016 and July 2017, associated metadata, and patient records. RESULTS: We identified 362 video recordings that were eligible for inclusion. Most video recordings (54.1%; 190/351) were captured by attending physicians. Specialties recording a high number of video recordings included orthopedic surgery (33.7%; 122/362), neurology (21.3%; 77/362), and ophthalmology (15.2%; 55/362). Consent was clearly documented in the medical record in less than one-third (31.8%; 115/362) of the records. People other than the patient were incidentally captured in 29.6% (107/362) of video recordings. Although video recordings were infrequently referenced in notes corresponding to the clinical encounter (12.2%; 44/362), 7.7% (22/286) of patients were video recorded in subsequent clinical encounters, with 82% (18/22) of these corresponding to the same finding seen in the index video. Store-and-forward telemedicine was documented in clinical notes in only 2 cases (0.5%; 2/362). Videos appeared to be of acceptable quality for clinical purposes. CONCLUSIONS: Video recordings were captured in a variety of clinical settings. Documentation of consent was inconsistent, and other individuals were incidentally included in videos. Although clinical impact was not always clearly evident through retrospective review because of limited documentation, potential uses include documentation for future reference and store-and-forward telemedicine. Repeat video recordings of the same finding provide evidence of use to track the findings over time. Clinical video recordings have the potential to support clinical care; however, documentation of consent requires standardization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6918202
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69182022020-01-06 Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis Cambron, Julia C Wyatt, Kirk D Lohse, Christine M Underwood, Page Y Hellmich, Thomas R JMIR Mhealth Uhealth Original Paper BACKGROUND: As mobile devices and apps grow in popularity, they are increasingly being used by health care providers to aid clinical care. At our institution, we developed and implemented a point-of-care clinical photography app that also permitted the capture of video recordings; however, the clinical findings it was used to capture and the outcomes that resulted following video recording were unclear. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess the use of a mobile clinical video recording app at our institution and its impact on clinical care. METHODS: A single reviewer retrospectively reviewed video recordings captured between April 2016 and July 2017, associated metadata, and patient records. RESULTS: We identified 362 video recordings that were eligible for inclusion. Most video recordings (54.1%; 190/351) were captured by attending physicians. Specialties recording a high number of video recordings included orthopedic surgery (33.7%; 122/362), neurology (21.3%; 77/362), and ophthalmology (15.2%; 55/362). Consent was clearly documented in the medical record in less than one-third (31.8%; 115/362) of the records. People other than the patient were incidentally captured in 29.6% (107/362) of video recordings. Although video recordings were infrequently referenced in notes corresponding to the clinical encounter (12.2%; 44/362), 7.7% (22/286) of patients were video recorded in subsequent clinical encounters, with 82% (18/22) of these corresponding to the same finding seen in the index video. Store-and-forward telemedicine was documented in clinical notes in only 2 cases (0.5%; 2/362). Videos appeared to be of acceptable quality for clinical purposes. CONCLUSIONS: Video recordings were captured in a variety of clinical settings. Documentation of consent was inconsistent, and other individuals were incidentally included in videos. Although clinical impact was not always clearly evident through retrospective review because of limited documentation, potential uses include documentation for future reference and store-and-forward telemedicine. Repeat video recordings of the same finding provide evidence of use to track the findings over time. Clinical video recordings have the potential to support clinical care; however, documentation of consent requires standardization. JMIR Publications 2019-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6918202/ /pubmed/31793894 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/14919 Text en ©Julia C David Cambron, Kirk D Wyatt, Christine M Lohse, Page Y Underwood, Thomas R Hellmich. Originally published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth (http://mhealth.jmir.org), 03.12.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mhealth.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Cambron, Julia C
Wyatt, Kirk D
Lohse, Christine M
Underwood, Page Y
Hellmich, Thomas R
Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis
title Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis
title_full Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis
title_fullStr Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis
title_short Medical Videography Using a Mobile App: Retrospective Analysis
title_sort medical videography using a mobile app: retrospective analysis
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6918202/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31793894
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/14919
work_keys_str_mv AT cambronjuliac medicalvideographyusingamobileappretrospectiveanalysis
AT wyattkirkd medicalvideographyusingamobileappretrospectiveanalysis
AT lohsechristinem medicalvideographyusingamobileappretrospectiveanalysis
AT underwoodpagey medicalvideographyusingamobileappretrospectiveanalysis
AT hellmichthomasr medicalvideographyusingamobileappretrospectiveanalysis