Rapid Evidence Review of Mobile Applications for Self-management of Diabetes

Stephanie Veazie, Kara Winchell, Jennifer Gilbert, Robin Paynter, Ilya Ivlev, Karen Eden, Kerri Nussbaum, Nicole Weiskopf, Jeanne-Marie Guise, Mark Helfand

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Patients with diabetes lack information on which commercially available applications (apps) improve diabetes-related outcomes. We conducted a rapid evidence review to examine features, clinical efficacy, and usability of apps for self-management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults. Methods: Ovid/Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for systematic reviews and technology assessments. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were examined for primary studies. Additional searches for primary studies were conducted online, through Ovid/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies were evaluated for eligibility based on predetermined criteria, data were extracted, study quality was assessed using a risk of bias tool, information on app features was collected, and app usability was assessed. Results are summarized qualitatively. Results: Fifteen articles evaluating 11 apps were identified: six apps for type 1 and five apps for type 2 diabetes. Common features of apps included setting reminders and tracking blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), medication use, physical activity, and weight. Compared with controls, use of eight apps, when paired with support from a healthcare provider or study staff, improved at least one outcome, most often HbA1c. Patients did not experience improvements in quality of life, blood pressure, or weight, regardless of app used or type of diabetes. Study quality was variable. Of the eight apps available for usability testing, two were scored “acceptable,” three were “marginal,” and three were “not acceptable.” Discussion: Limited evidence suggests that use of some commercially available apps, when combined with additional support from a healthcare provider or study staff, may improve some short-term diabetes-related outcomes. The impact of these apps on longer-term outcomes is unclear. More rigorous and longer-term studies of apps are needed. Registration: This review was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The protocol is available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/diabetes-mobile-devices/research-protocol.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-10
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of General Internal Medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - May 8 2018

Fingerprint

Mobile Applications
Self Care
Health Personnel
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Hemoglobins
Weights and Measures
Biomedical Technology Assessment
Health Services Research
Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus
Blood Glucose
Quality of Life
Databases
Exercise
Blood Pressure
Equipment and Supplies
Research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Internal Medicine

Cite this

Rapid Evidence Review of Mobile Applications for Self-management of Diabetes. / Veazie, Stephanie; Winchell, Kara; Gilbert, Jennifer; Paynter, Robin; Ivlev, Ilya; Eden, Karen; Nussbaum, Kerri; Weiskopf, Nicole; Guise, Jeanne-Marie; Helfand, Mark.

In: Journal of General Internal Medicine, 08.05.2018, p. 1-10.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Veazie, Stephanie ; Winchell, Kara ; Gilbert, Jennifer ; Paynter, Robin ; Ivlev, Ilya ; Eden, Karen ; Nussbaum, Kerri ; Weiskopf, Nicole ; Guise, Jeanne-Marie ; Helfand, Mark. / Rapid Evidence Review of Mobile Applications for Self-management of Diabetes. In: Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2018 ; pp. 1-10.
@article{e97ff3c9434e49eaae83b88a717d6398,
title = "Rapid Evidence Review of Mobile Applications for Self-management of Diabetes",
abstract = "Background: Patients with diabetes lack information on which commercially available applications (apps) improve diabetes-related outcomes. We conducted a rapid evidence review to examine features, clinical efficacy, and usability of apps for self-management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults. Methods: Ovid/Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for systematic reviews and technology assessments. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were examined for primary studies. Additional searches for primary studies were conducted online, through Ovid/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies were evaluated for eligibility based on predetermined criteria, data were extracted, study quality was assessed using a risk of bias tool, information on app features was collected, and app usability was assessed. Results are summarized qualitatively. Results: Fifteen articles evaluating 11 apps were identified: six apps for type 1 and five apps for type 2 diabetes. Common features of apps included setting reminders and tracking blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), medication use, physical activity, and weight. Compared with controls, use of eight apps, when paired with support from a healthcare provider or study staff, improved at least one outcome, most often HbA1c. Patients did not experience improvements in quality of life, blood pressure, or weight, regardless of app used or type of diabetes. Study quality was variable. Of the eight apps available for usability testing, two were scored “acceptable,” three were “marginal,” and three were “not acceptable.” Discussion: Limited evidence suggests that use of some commercially available apps, when combined with additional support from a healthcare provider or study staff, may improve some short-term diabetes-related outcomes. The impact of these apps on longer-term outcomes is unclear. More rigorous and longer-term studies of apps are needed. Registration: This review was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The protocol is available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/diabetes-mobile-devices/research-protocol.",
author = "Stephanie Veazie and Kara Winchell and Jennifer Gilbert and Robin Paynter and Ilya Ivlev and Karen Eden and Kerri Nussbaum and Nicole Weiskopf and Jeanne-Marie Guise and Mark Helfand",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "8",
doi = "10.1007/s11606-018-4410-1",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--10",
journal = "Journal of General Internal Medicine",
issn = "0884-8734",
publisher = "Springer New York",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rapid Evidence Review of Mobile Applications for Self-management of Diabetes

AU - Veazie, Stephanie

AU - Winchell, Kara

AU - Gilbert, Jennifer

AU - Paynter, Robin

AU - Ivlev, Ilya

AU - Eden, Karen

AU - Nussbaum, Kerri

AU - Weiskopf, Nicole

AU - Guise, Jeanne-Marie

AU - Helfand, Mark

PY - 2018/5/8

Y1 - 2018/5/8

N2 - Background: Patients with diabetes lack information on which commercially available applications (apps) improve diabetes-related outcomes. We conducted a rapid evidence review to examine features, clinical efficacy, and usability of apps for self-management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults. Methods: Ovid/Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for systematic reviews and technology assessments. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were examined for primary studies. Additional searches for primary studies were conducted online, through Ovid/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies were evaluated for eligibility based on predetermined criteria, data were extracted, study quality was assessed using a risk of bias tool, information on app features was collected, and app usability was assessed. Results are summarized qualitatively. Results: Fifteen articles evaluating 11 apps were identified: six apps for type 1 and five apps for type 2 diabetes. Common features of apps included setting reminders and tracking blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), medication use, physical activity, and weight. Compared with controls, use of eight apps, when paired with support from a healthcare provider or study staff, improved at least one outcome, most often HbA1c. Patients did not experience improvements in quality of life, blood pressure, or weight, regardless of app used or type of diabetes. Study quality was variable. Of the eight apps available for usability testing, two were scored “acceptable,” three were “marginal,” and three were “not acceptable.” Discussion: Limited evidence suggests that use of some commercially available apps, when combined with additional support from a healthcare provider or study staff, may improve some short-term diabetes-related outcomes. The impact of these apps on longer-term outcomes is unclear. More rigorous and longer-term studies of apps are needed. Registration: This review was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The protocol is available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/diabetes-mobile-devices/research-protocol.

AB - Background: Patients with diabetes lack information on which commercially available applications (apps) improve diabetes-related outcomes. We conducted a rapid evidence review to examine features, clinical efficacy, and usability of apps for self-management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in adults. Methods: Ovid/Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for systematic reviews and technology assessments. Reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were examined for primary studies. Additional searches for primary studies were conducted online, through Ovid/Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies were evaluated for eligibility based on predetermined criteria, data were extracted, study quality was assessed using a risk of bias tool, information on app features was collected, and app usability was assessed. Results are summarized qualitatively. Results: Fifteen articles evaluating 11 apps were identified: six apps for type 1 and five apps for type 2 diabetes. Common features of apps included setting reminders and tracking blood glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), medication use, physical activity, and weight. Compared with controls, use of eight apps, when paired with support from a healthcare provider or study staff, improved at least one outcome, most often HbA1c. Patients did not experience improvements in quality of life, blood pressure, or weight, regardless of app used or type of diabetes. Study quality was variable. Of the eight apps available for usability testing, two were scored “acceptable,” three were “marginal,” and three were “not acceptable.” Discussion: Limited evidence suggests that use of some commercially available apps, when combined with additional support from a healthcare provider or study staff, may improve some short-term diabetes-related outcomes. The impact of these apps on longer-term outcomes is unclear. More rigorous and longer-term studies of apps are needed. Registration: This review was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). The protocol is available at: http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/topics/diabetes-mobile-devices/research-protocol.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046628898&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85046628898&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11606-018-4410-1

DO - 10.1007/s11606-018-4410-1

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 10

JO - Journal of General Internal Medicine

JF - Journal of General Internal Medicine

SN - 0884-8734

ER -