Can apps be used to formulate fluid therapy plans in veterinary medicine?

BACKGROUND: Formulating sophisticated fluid therapy plans can be complicated and time consuming. Consequently, veterinarians in the field who lack experience, time, or confidence may formulate suboptimal fluid therapy plans. OBJECTIVES: Compare conventional and app‐guided fluid therapy plans for simulated cases of neonatal calf diarrhea. PARTICIPANTS: Third and fourth year veterinary students (n = 55) from The University of Sydney. METHODS: We developed a web app to assist fluid therapy formulation (http://calfaid.com) that was evaluated in a randomized case simulation trial. Participants were instructed to perform fluid therapy calculations and formulate an integrated fluid therapy plan for case scenarios using conventional methods and using the fluid therapy app. Responses were scored by a blinded study investigator using an a priori scoring guide and groups (conventional vs. app‐guided) were compared using linear mixed models. RESULTS: On average, total scores for app‐guided fluid therapy calculations were 20.6% points higher (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.1‐27.1) than calculations completed using the conventional method (88.2% vs. 67.5%, respectively). On average, total scores for app‐guided integrated fluid therapy plans were 14.2% points higher (95% CI, 6.3‐22.2; 65.8% vs. 51.2%). Eighty percent of respondents indicated they would prefer to use the app‐guided method over the conventional method. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Our findings suggest that fluid therapy plans can be improved using apps.