Perspectives of Patients With Orthopedic Trauma on Fully Automated Digital Physical Activity Measurement at Home: Cross-sectional Survey Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The automated digital surveillance of physical activity at home after surgical procedures could facilitate the monitoring of postoperative follow-up, reduce costs, and enhance patients' satisfaction. Data on the willingness of patients with orthopedic trauma to undergo automated home surveillance postoperatively are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to assess whether patients with orthopedic trauma would be generally willing to use the proposed automated digital home surveillance system and determine what advantages and disadvantages the system could bring with it. METHODS: Between June 2021 and October 2021, a survey among outpatients with orthopedic trauma who were treated at a European level 1 trauma center was conducted. The only inclusion criterion was an age of at least 16 years. The paper questionnaire first described the possibility of fully automated movement and motion detection (via cameras or sensors) at home without any action required from the patient. The questionnaire then asked for the participants' demographics and presented 6 specific questions on the study topic. RESULTS: In total, we included 201 patients whose mean age was 46.9 (SD 18.6) years. Most of the assessed patients (124/201, 61.7%) were male. Almost half of the patients (83/201, 41.3%) were aged between 30 and 55 years. The most stated occupation was a nine-to-five job (62/199, 30.8%). The majority of the participants (120/201, 59.7%) could imagine using the proposed measurement system, with no significant differences among the genders. An insignificant higher number of younger patients stated that they would use the automated surveillance system. No significant difference was seen among different occupations (P=.41). Significantly more young patients were using smartphones (P=.004) or electronic devices with a camera (P=.008). Less than half of the surveyed patients (95/201, 47.3%) stated that they were using tracking apps. The most stated advantages were fewer physician visits (110/201, 54.7%) and less effort (102/201, 50.7%), whereas the most prevalent disadvantage was the missing physician-patient contact (144/201, 71.6%). Significantly more patients with a part-time job or a nine-to-five job stated that data analysis contributes to medical progress (P=.047). CONCLUSIONS: Most of the assessed participants (120/201, 59.7%) stated that they would use the automated digital measurement system to observe their postoperative follow-up and recovery. The proposed system could be used to reduce costs and ease hospital capacity issues. In order to successfully implement such systems, patients' concerns must be addressed, and further studies on the feasibility of these systems are needed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».