Cargando…

Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners

BACKGROUND: mHealth, the practice of medicine aided by mobile devices is a growing market. Although the offer on Anesthesia applications (Apps) is quite prolific, representative formal assessments on the views of anesthesia practitioners on its use and potential place in daily practice is lacking. T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carvalho, Hugo, Verdonck, Michael, Forget, Patrice, Poelaert, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7053134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32126985
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-00958-3
_version_ 1783502981452267520
author Carvalho, Hugo
Verdonck, Michael
Forget, Patrice
Poelaert, Jan
author_facet Carvalho, Hugo
Verdonck, Michael
Forget, Patrice
Poelaert, Jan
author_sort Carvalho, Hugo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: mHealth, the practice of medicine aided by mobile devices is a growing market. Although the offer on Anesthesia applications (Apps) is quite prolific, representative formal assessments on the views of anesthesia practitioners on its use and potential place in daily practice is lacking. This survey aimed thus to cross-assess the Belgian anesthesia population on the use of smartphone Apps and peripherals. METHODS: The survey was exclusively distributed as an online anonymous questionnaire. Sharing took place via hyperlink forwarding by the Belgian Society for Anesthesia and Reanimation (BSAR) and by the Belgian Association for Regional Anesthesia (BARA) to all registered members. The first answer took place on 5 September 2018, the last on 22 January 2019. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-nine answers were obtained (26.9% corresponding to trainees, 73.1% to specialists). Anesthesiologists were positively confident that Apps and peripherals could help improve anesthesia care (57.0 and 47.9%, respectively, scored 4 or 5, in a scale from 0 to 5). Trainees were significantly more confident than specialists on both mobile Apps (71.2% and 51.8%, respectively; p = 0.001) and peripherals (77.7% and 45.1%, respectively; p = 0.09). The usefulness of Apps and Peripherals was rated 1 or below (on a 0 to 5 scale), respectively, by 9.5 and 14.6% of the total surveyed population, being specialists proportionally less confident in Smartphone peripherals than trainees (p = 0.008). Mobile apps are actively used by a significantly higher proportional number of trainees (67.0% vs. 37.3%, respectively; p = 0.000001). The preferred category of mobile Apps was dose-calculating applications (39.15%), followed by digital books (21. 1%) and Apps for active perioperative monitoring (20.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Belgian Anesthesia practitioners show a global positive attitude towards smartphone Apps and Peripherals, with trainees trending to be more confident than specialists. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov database Identifier: NCT03750084. Retrospectively registered on 21 November 2018.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7053134
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70531342020-03-10 Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners Carvalho, Hugo Verdonck, Michael Forget, Patrice Poelaert, Jan BMC Anesthesiol Research Article BACKGROUND: mHealth, the practice of medicine aided by mobile devices is a growing market. Although the offer on Anesthesia applications (Apps) is quite prolific, representative formal assessments on the views of anesthesia practitioners on its use and potential place in daily practice is lacking. This survey aimed thus to cross-assess the Belgian anesthesia population on the use of smartphone Apps and peripherals. METHODS: The survey was exclusively distributed as an online anonymous questionnaire. Sharing took place via hyperlink forwarding by the Belgian Society for Anesthesia and Reanimation (BSAR) and by the Belgian Association for Regional Anesthesia (BARA) to all registered members. The first answer took place on 5 September 2018, the last on 22 January 2019. RESULTS: Three hundred forty-nine answers were obtained (26.9% corresponding to trainees, 73.1% to specialists). Anesthesiologists were positively confident that Apps and peripherals could help improve anesthesia care (57.0 and 47.9%, respectively, scored 4 or 5, in a scale from 0 to 5). Trainees were significantly more confident than specialists on both mobile Apps (71.2% and 51.8%, respectively; p = 0.001) and peripherals (77.7% and 45.1%, respectively; p = 0.09). The usefulness of Apps and Peripherals was rated 1 or below (on a 0 to 5 scale), respectively, by 9.5 and 14.6% of the total surveyed population, being specialists proportionally less confident in Smartphone peripherals than trainees (p = 0.008). Mobile apps are actively used by a significantly higher proportional number of trainees (67.0% vs. 37.3%, respectively; p = 0.000001). The preferred category of mobile Apps was dose-calculating applications (39.15%), followed by digital books (21. 1%) and Apps for active perioperative monitoring (20.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Belgian Anesthesia practitioners show a global positive attitude towards smartphone Apps and Peripherals, with trainees trending to be more confident than specialists. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov database Identifier: NCT03750084. Retrospectively registered on 21 November 2018. BioMed Central 2020-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7053134/ /pubmed/32126985 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-00958-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Carvalho, Hugo
Verdonck, Michael
Forget, Patrice
Poelaert, Jan
Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners
title Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners
title_full Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners
title_fullStr Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners
title_full_unstemmed Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners
title_short Acceptance of mHealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners
title_sort acceptance of mhealth among health professionals: a case study on anesthesia practitioners
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7053134/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32126985
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12871-020-00958-3
work_keys_str_mv AT carvalhohugo acceptanceofmhealthamonghealthprofessionalsacasestudyonanesthesiapractitioners
AT verdonckmichael acceptanceofmhealthamonghealthprofessionalsacasestudyonanesthesiapractitioners
AT forgetpatrice acceptanceofmhealthamonghealthprofessionalsacasestudyonanesthesiapractitioners
AT poelaertjan acceptanceofmhealthamonghealthprofessionalsacasestudyonanesthesiapractitioners