4.3 Article

Assessing the use of BreatheSmart® mobile technology in adult patients with asthma: a remote observational study

期刊

BMJ OPEN RESPIRATORY RESEARCH
卷 4, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2017-000204

关键词

-

资金

  1. Cohero Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction Non-adherence to asthma daily controller medications is a common problem, reported to be responsible for 60% of asthma-related hospitalisations. The mean level of adherence for asthma medications is estimated to be as low as 22%. Therefore, objective measurements of adherence to medicine are necessary. This virtual observational study is designed to measure the usability of an electronic monitoring device platform that measures adherence. Understanding how patients use the BreatheSmart mobile technology at home is essential to assess its feasibility as a solution to improve medication adherence. We anticipate this approach can be applied to real-world environments as a cost-effective solution to improve medication adherence. Methods and analysis This is a virtual 6-month observational study of 100 adults (>= 18 years) with an asthma diagnosis, using inhaled corticosteroids for at least 3 months. Participants will be recruited in the USA through ad placements online. All participants receive wireless Bluetooth-enabled inhaler sensors that track medication usage and an mSpirometer (TM) capable of clinical-grade lung function measurements, and download the BreatheSmart mobile application that transmits data to a secure server. All analyses are based on an intention-to-treat. Usability is assessed by patient questionnaires and question sessions. Simple paired t-test is used to assess significant change in Asthma Control Test score, quality of life (EuroQol-5D questionnaire) and lung function. Ethics and dissemination No ethical or safety concerns pertain to the collection of these data. Results of this research are planned to be published as soon as available.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据