Suppr超能文献

利用基于技术的工具支持患有慢性病的青少年和年轻成年人:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Use of Technology-Based Tools to Support Adolescents and Young Adults With Chronic Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia.

出版信息

JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019 Jul 18;7(7):e12042. doi: 10.2196/12042.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

With the large amount of material that is readily available on the internet, there are endless opportunities for electronic health-literate patients to obtain and learn new information. Although novel, a Web- or mobile-based program can be a powerful way to engage adolescents and young adults (AYAs). The ongoing engagement of AYAs with chronic disease is vital not only to empower them but also to ensure a smooth transition from pediatric to adult health care.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the current evidence on Web- or mobile-based interventions designed for AYAs.

METHODS

This review was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42018096487. A systematic search of MEDLINE Complete, EMBASE, and CINAHL Complete was conducted on April 10, 2019, for studies that examined the perspectives of transition-age patients about technology-based interventions, the process involved in intervention development, or the evaluation of intervention efficacy. For each study, the comprehensiveness of reporting was appraised. The Downs and Black checklist was used for intervention efficacy trials, the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist was used for qualitative work, and a 16-item tool developed by Tong et al was used for questionnaire research.

RESULTS

The search uncovered 29 relevant studies, which included qualitative studies (n=14), intervention efficacy studies (n=7), questionnaire studies (n=4), mixed qualitative and questionnaire studies (n=2), and a mixed qualitative and pilot randomized controlled trial study (n=1). The reporting comprehensiveness score of questionnaires was rated considerably lower (n=6, 13%-57% [2/16-8/14]) than the scores of intervention efficacy trials (n=8, 48%-85% [13/27-23/27]) and qualitative research (n=17, 40%-93% [8.5/21-19.5/21]). AYAs were receptive to obtaining information via a website or mobile app. An intervention was more likely to be perceived as useful by AYAs when there was a concerted effort to involve AYAs and subject matter experts in the process of intervention design, as opposed to relying solely on the AYAs or the experts alone. The preferred medium of intervention delivery varied greatly for AYAs, ranging from static text to audiovisual materials. However, AYAs considered being concise was the most important aspect. Across different conditions, AYAs were interested in receiving information on diverse topics, such as anxiety and stress management, dealing with insurance, and having social relationships. Patients also requested for disease-specific information, such as weather forecasts and pollen levels for patients with asthma and information related to the pretransplant period for organ transplant recipients. Meta-analyses showed no significant group differences across time on quality of life, self-efficacy, and self-management.

CONCLUSIONS

Owing to the lack of intervention efficacy trials, no conclusion can be drawn if an intervention delivered via a mobile app is better than that delivered via a website. However, through this systematic review, it is confirmed that AYAs were receptive to receiving medical information electronically.

摘要

背景

随着互联网上大量资料的涌现,电子健康素养患者获取和学习新信息的机会无穷无尽。虽然新颖,但基于网络或移动的程序可以成为吸引青少年和年轻人(AYAs)的有力方式。AYAs 持续参与慢性病不仅对赋予他们权力至关重要,而且对确保从儿科到成人保健的顺利过渡也至关重要。

目的

本研究旨在评估专为 AYAs 设计的基于网络或移动的干预措施的现有证据。

方法

该综述在 PROSPERO 上进行了注册:CRD42018096487。于 2019 年 4 月 10 日对 MEDLINE Complete、EMBASE 和 CINAHL Complete 进行了系统搜索,以查找探讨过渡年龄患者对基于技术的干预措施的看法、干预措施开发过程中涉及的问题或评估干预措施效果的研究。对每项研究,均评估了报告的全面性。Downs 和 Black 清单用于干预效果试验,标准报告定性研究清单用于定性工作,Tong 等人开发的 16 项工具用于问卷调查研究。

结果

搜索结果发现了 29 项相关研究,其中包括定性研究(n=14)、干预效果研究(n=7)、问卷调查研究(n=4)、定性和问卷调查混合研究(n=2)以及定性和试点随机对照试验混合研究(n=1)。问卷研究的报告全面性评分(n=6,13%-57%[2/16-8/14])明显低于干预效果试验(n=8,48%-85%[13/27-23/27])和定性研究(n=17,40%-93%[8.5/21-19.5/21])的评分。当青少年和主题专家共同参与干预设计过程时,而不是仅依靠青少年或专家时,青少年更有可能认为干预措施有用。青少年对干预措施的首选传递方式差异很大,从静态文本到视听材料都有。然而,青少年认为简洁是最重要的方面。在不同的情况下,青少年都有兴趣接收有关焦虑和压力管理、保险处理和社交关系等各种主题的信息。患者还要求提供特定疾病的信息,例如哮喘患者的天气预报和花粉水平信息以及器官移植受者的移植前信息。荟萃分析显示,在生活质量、自我效能和自我管理方面,各时间点组间无显著差异。

结论

由于缺乏干预效果试验,因此无法确定通过移动应用程序提供的干预措施是否优于通过网站提供的干预措施。但是,通过这项系统评价,我们可以确认 AYAs 愿意通过电子方式接收医疗信息。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b726/6670279/27b3cec1d16e/mhealth_v7i7e12042_fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验