对标SaMD在慢性疾病管理中的临床结果:系统的文献回顾比较。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Frontiers in Public Health Pub Date : 2024-12-24 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpubh.2024.1488687
Sofoklis Kyriazakos, Aristodemos Pnevmatikakis, Konstantina Kostopoulou, Laurent Ferrière, Kyun Thibaut, Erika Giacobini, Roberta Pastorino, Marco Gorini, Peter Fenici
{"title":"对标SaMD在慢性疾病管理中的临床结果:系统的文献回顾比较。","authors":"Sofoklis Kyriazakos, Aristodemos Pnevmatikakis, Konstantina Kostopoulou, Laurent Ferrière, Kyun Thibaut, Erika Giacobini, Roberta Pastorino, Marco Gorini, Peter Fenici","doi":"10.3389/fpubh.2024.1488687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) and mobile health (mHealth) applications have revolutionized the healthcare landscape in the areas of remote patient monitoring (RPM) and digital therapeutics (DTx). These technological advancements offer a range of benefits, from improved patient engagement and real-time monitoring, to evidence-based personalized treatment plans, risk prediction, and enhanced clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The systematic literature review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the status of SaMD and mHealth apps, highlight the promising results, and discuss what is the potential of these technologies for improving health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The research methodology was structured in two phases. In the first phase, a search was conducted in the EuropePMC (EPMC) database up to April 2024 for systematic reviews on studies using the PICO model. The study population comprised individuals afflicted by chronic diseases; the intervention involved the utilization of mHealth solutions in comparison to any alternative intervention; the desired outcome focused on the efficient monitoring of patients. Systematic reviews fulfilling these criteria were incorporated within the framework of this study. The second phase of the investigation involved identifying and assessing clinical studies referenced in the systematic reviews, followed by the synthesis of their risk profiles and clinical benefits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results are rather positive, demonstrating how SaMDs can support the management of chronic diseases, satisfying patient safety and performance requirements. The principal findings, after the analysis of the extraction table referring to the 35 primary studies included, are: 24 studies (68.6%) analyzed clinical indications for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), six studies (17.1%) analyzed clinical indications for cardiovascular conditions, three studies (8.7%) analyzed clinical indications for cancer, one study (2.8%) analyzed clinical indications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and one study (2.8%) analyzed clinical indications for hypertension. No severe adverse events related to the use of mHealth were reported in any of them. However, five studies (14.3%) reported mild adverse events (related to hypoglycemia, uncontrolled hypertension), and four studies (11.4%) reported technical issues with the devices (related to missing patient adherence requirements, Bluetooth unsuccessful pairing, and poor network connections). For what concerns variables of interest, out of the 35 studies, 14 reported positive results on the reduction of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) with the use of mHealth devices. Eight studies examined health-related quality of life (HRQoL); in three cases, there were no statistically significant differences, while the groups using mHealth devices in the other five studies experienced better HRQoL. Seven studies focused on physical activity and performance, all reflecting increased attention to physical activity levels. Six studies addressed depression and anxiety, with mostly self-reported benefits observed. Four studies each reported improvements in body fat and adherence to medications in the mHealth solutions arm. Three studies examined blood pressure (BP), reporting reduction in BP, and three studies addressed BMI, with one finding no statistically significant change and two instead BMI reduction. Two studies reported significant weight/waist reduction and reduced hospital readmissions. Finally, individual studies noted improvements in sleep quality/time, self-care/management, six-minute walk distance (6MWD), and exacerbation outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The systematic literature review demonstrates the significant potential of software as a medical device (SaMD) and mobile health (mHealth) applications in revolutionizing chronic disease management through remote patient monitoring (RPM) and digital therapeutics (DTx). The evidence synthesized from multiple systematic reviews and clinical studies indicates that these technologies, exemplified by solutions like Healthentia, can effectively support patient monitoring and improve health outcomes while meeting crucial safety and performance requirements. The positive results observed across various chronic conditions underscore the transformative role of digital health interventions in modern healthcare delivery. However, further research is needed to address long-term efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and integration into existing healthcare systems. As the field rapidly evolves, continued evaluation and refinement of these technologies will be essential to fully realize their potential in enhancing patient care and health management strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12548,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Public Health","volume":"12 ","pages":"1488687"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11703908/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benchmarking the clinical outcomes of Healthentia SaMD in chronic disease management: a systematic literature review comparison.\",\"authors\":\"Sofoklis Kyriazakos, Aristodemos Pnevmatikakis, Konstantina Kostopoulou, Laurent Ferrière, Kyun Thibaut, Erika Giacobini, Roberta Pastorino, Marco Gorini, Peter Fenici\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fpubh.2024.1488687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) and mobile health (mHealth) applications have revolutionized the healthcare landscape in the areas of remote patient monitoring (RPM) and digital therapeutics (DTx). These technological advancements offer a range of benefits, from improved patient engagement and real-time monitoring, to evidence-based personalized treatment plans, risk prediction, and enhanced clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The systematic literature review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the status of SaMD and mHealth apps, highlight the promising results, and discuss what is the potential of these technologies for improving health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The research methodology was structured in two phases. In the first phase, a search was conducted in the EuropePMC (EPMC) database up to April 2024 for systematic reviews on studies using the PICO model. The study population comprised individuals afflicted by chronic diseases; the intervention involved the utilization of mHealth solutions in comparison to any alternative intervention; the desired outcome focused on the efficient monitoring of patients. Systematic reviews fulfilling these criteria were incorporated within the framework of this study. The second phase of the investigation involved identifying and assessing clinical studies referenced in the systematic reviews, followed by the synthesis of their risk profiles and clinical benefits.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results are rather positive, demonstrating how SaMDs can support the management of chronic diseases, satisfying patient safety and performance requirements. The principal findings, after the analysis of the extraction table referring to the 35 primary studies included, are: 24 studies (68.6%) analyzed clinical indications for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), six studies (17.1%) analyzed clinical indications for cardiovascular conditions, three studies (8.7%) analyzed clinical indications for cancer, one study (2.8%) analyzed clinical indications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and one study (2.8%) analyzed clinical indications for hypertension. No severe adverse events related to the use of mHealth were reported in any of them. However, five studies (14.3%) reported mild adverse events (related to hypoglycemia, uncontrolled hypertension), and four studies (11.4%) reported technical issues with the devices (related to missing patient adherence requirements, Bluetooth unsuccessful pairing, and poor network connections). For what concerns variables of interest, out of the 35 studies, 14 reported positive results on the reduction of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) with the use of mHealth devices. Eight studies examined health-related quality of life (HRQoL); in three cases, there were no statistically significant differences, while the groups using mHealth devices in the other five studies experienced better HRQoL. Seven studies focused on physical activity and performance, all reflecting increased attention to physical activity levels. Six studies addressed depression and anxiety, with mostly self-reported benefits observed. Four studies each reported improvements in body fat and adherence to medications in the mHealth solutions arm. Three studies examined blood pressure (BP), reporting reduction in BP, and three studies addressed BMI, with one finding no statistically significant change and two instead BMI reduction. Two studies reported significant weight/waist reduction and reduced hospital readmissions. Finally, individual studies noted improvements in sleep quality/time, self-care/management, six-minute walk distance (6MWD), and exacerbation outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The systematic literature review demonstrates the significant potential of software as a medical device (SaMD) and mobile health (mHealth) applications in revolutionizing chronic disease management through remote patient monitoring (RPM) and digital therapeutics (DTx). The evidence synthesized from multiple systematic reviews and clinical studies indicates that these technologies, exemplified by solutions like Healthentia, can effectively support patient monitoring and improve health outcomes while meeting crucial safety and performance requirements. The positive results observed across various chronic conditions underscore the transformative role of digital health interventions in modern healthcare delivery. However, further research is needed to address long-term efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and integration into existing healthcare systems. As the field rapidly evolves, continued evaluation and refinement of these technologies will be essential to fully realize their potential in enhancing patient care and health management strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12548,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Public Health\",\"volume\":\"12 \",\"pages\":\"1488687\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11703908/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1488687\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1488687","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:作为医疗设备的软件(SaMD)和移动医疗(mHealth)应用已经彻底改变了远程患者监测(RPM)和数字治疗(DTx)领域的医疗保健领域。这些技术进步带来了一系列好处,从提高患者参与度和实时监测到基于证据的个性化治疗计划、风险预测和增强临床结果。目的:系统的文献综述旨在全面概述SaMD和移动健康应用程序的现状,突出有希望的结果,并讨论这些技术在改善健康结果方面的潜力。方法:研究方法分为两个阶段。在第一阶段,在欧洲pmc (EPMC)数据库中进行搜索,直到2024年4月,对使用PICO模型的研究进行系统评价。研究人群包括患有慢性疾病的个体;与任何替代干预措施相比,干预措施涉及移动医疗解决方案的利用;期望的结果集中在对患者的有效监测上。满足这些标准的系统评价被纳入本研究的框架。调查的第二阶段涉及识别和评估系统评价中引用的临床研究,然后综合其风险概况和临床益处。结果:结果是相当积极的,证明了samd如何支持慢性疾病的管理,满足患者安全和性能要求。根据纳入的35项主要研究对提取表进行分析后,主要发现如下:分析2型糖尿病(T2DM)临床指征的研究有24项(68.6%),分析心血管疾病临床指征的研究有6项(17.1%),分析癌症临床指征的研究有3项(8.7%),分析慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)临床指征的研究有1项(2.8%),分析高血压临床指征的研究有1项(2.8%)。其中没有报告与使用移动医疗相关的严重不良事件。然而,5项研究(14.3%)报告了轻度不良事件(与低血糖、未控制的高血压有关),4项研究(11.4%)报告了设备的技术问题(与患者依从性要求缺失、蓝牙配对失败和网络连接不良有关)。对于感兴趣的变量,在35项研究中,14项报告了使用移动医疗设备降低糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)的积极结果。8项研究检查了与健康相关的生活质量(HRQoL);在三种情况下,没有统计学上的显著差异,而在其他五项研究中,使用移动健康设备的组的HRQoL更好。七项研究聚焦于身体活动和表现,都反映出人们对身体活动水平的关注有所增加。六项针对抑郁和焦虑的研究,大多是观察到自我报告的益处。四项研究均报告了移动医疗解决方案部门对体脂和药物依从性的改善。三项研究检查了血压(BP),报告了血压的降低,三项研究研究了BMI,其中一项研究发现没有统计学上的显著变化,另两项研究发现BMI降低了。两项研究报告了显著的体重/腰围减轻和再入院率降低。最后,个别研究注意到睡眠质量/时间、自我护理/管理、6分钟步行距离(6MWD)和恶化结果的改善。结论:系统的文献综述表明,通过远程患者监测(RPM)和数字治疗(DTx),软件作为医疗设备(SaMD)和移动健康(mHealth)应用,在彻底改变慢性疾病管理方面具有巨大潜力。从多个系统评价和临床研究中综合得出的证据表明,以Healthentia等解决方案为例的这些技术可以有效地支持患者监测并改善健康结果,同时满足关键的安全和性能要求。在各种慢性疾病中观察到的积极结果强调了数字健康干预在现代医疗保健服务中的变革性作用。然而,需要进一步的研究来解决长期疗效、成本效益和与现有医疗保健系统的整合。随着该领域的快速发展,对这些技术的持续评估和改进对于充分发挥其在增强患者护理和健康管理策略方面的潜力至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Benchmarking the clinical outcomes of Healthentia SaMD in chronic disease management: a systematic literature review comparison.

Background: Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) and mobile health (mHealth) applications have revolutionized the healthcare landscape in the areas of remote patient monitoring (RPM) and digital therapeutics (DTx). These technological advancements offer a range of benefits, from improved patient engagement and real-time monitoring, to evidence-based personalized treatment plans, risk prediction, and enhanced clinical outcomes.

Objective: The systematic literature review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the status of SaMD and mHealth apps, highlight the promising results, and discuss what is the potential of these technologies for improving health outcomes.

Methods: The research methodology was structured in two phases. In the first phase, a search was conducted in the EuropePMC (EPMC) database up to April 2024 for systematic reviews on studies using the PICO model. The study population comprised individuals afflicted by chronic diseases; the intervention involved the utilization of mHealth solutions in comparison to any alternative intervention; the desired outcome focused on the efficient monitoring of patients. Systematic reviews fulfilling these criteria were incorporated within the framework of this study. The second phase of the investigation involved identifying and assessing clinical studies referenced in the systematic reviews, followed by the synthesis of their risk profiles and clinical benefits.

Results: The results are rather positive, demonstrating how SaMDs can support the management of chronic diseases, satisfying patient safety and performance requirements. The principal findings, after the analysis of the extraction table referring to the 35 primary studies included, are: 24 studies (68.6%) analyzed clinical indications for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), six studies (17.1%) analyzed clinical indications for cardiovascular conditions, three studies (8.7%) analyzed clinical indications for cancer, one study (2.8%) analyzed clinical indications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and one study (2.8%) analyzed clinical indications for hypertension. No severe adverse events related to the use of mHealth were reported in any of them. However, five studies (14.3%) reported mild adverse events (related to hypoglycemia, uncontrolled hypertension), and four studies (11.4%) reported technical issues with the devices (related to missing patient adherence requirements, Bluetooth unsuccessful pairing, and poor network connections). For what concerns variables of interest, out of the 35 studies, 14 reported positive results on the reduction of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) with the use of mHealth devices. Eight studies examined health-related quality of life (HRQoL); in three cases, there were no statistically significant differences, while the groups using mHealth devices in the other five studies experienced better HRQoL. Seven studies focused on physical activity and performance, all reflecting increased attention to physical activity levels. Six studies addressed depression and anxiety, with mostly self-reported benefits observed. Four studies each reported improvements in body fat and adherence to medications in the mHealth solutions arm. Three studies examined blood pressure (BP), reporting reduction in BP, and three studies addressed BMI, with one finding no statistically significant change and two instead BMI reduction. Two studies reported significant weight/waist reduction and reduced hospital readmissions. Finally, individual studies noted improvements in sleep quality/time, self-care/management, six-minute walk distance (6MWD), and exacerbation outcomes.

Conclusion: The systematic literature review demonstrates the significant potential of software as a medical device (SaMD) and mobile health (mHealth) applications in revolutionizing chronic disease management through remote patient monitoring (RPM) and digital therapeutics (DTx). The evidence synthesized from multiple systematic reviews and clinical studies indicates that these technologies, exemplified by solutions like Healthentia, can effectively support patient monitoring and improve health outcomes while meeting crucial safety and performance requirements. The positive results observed across various chronic conditions underscore the transformative role of digital health interventions in modern healthcare delivery. However, further research is needed to address long-term efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and integration into existing healthcare systems. As the field rapidly evolves, continued evaluation and refinement of these technologies will be essential to fully realize their potential in enhancing patient care and health management strategies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Public Health
Frontiers in Public Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
4469
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Public Health is a multidisciplinary open-access journal which publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research and is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians, policy makers and the public worldwide. The journal aims at overcoming current fragmentation in research and publication, promoting consistency in pursuing relevant scientific themes, and supporting finding dissemination and translation into practice. Frontiers in Public Health is organized into Specialty Sections that cover different areas of research in the field. Please refer to the author guidelines for details on article types and the submission process.
期刊最新文献
Understanding vitiligo-related concerns through online discourse: an AI-assisted cross-platform study of Chinese and global communities. Demographic and regional trends in pneumonia and sepsis related mortality in the U.S., 1999-2020: a CDC wonder database analysis. Latent profile analysis of change fatigue among clinical nurses: a cross-sectional study. Explainable AI for early developmental disability detection: a neuro-fuzzy approach. Association between dog ownership and mental health among community-dwelling older adults: a cross-sectional study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1