MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091117720 · doi:10.2196/mhealth.3929

Using a Mobile App for Monitoring Post-Operative Quality of Recovery of Patients at Home: A Feasibility Study

2015· article· en· W2091117720 on OpenAlexaffvenue
John L. Semple, Sarah Harvey, M. Lucas Murnaghan, John Theodoropoulos, Kelly Metcalfe

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEnhanced Recovery After Surgery
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOrthopedic surgeryAmbulatoryPatient satisfactionmHealthMobile appsMobile phoneQuality of life (healthcare)Physical therapySurgeryPsychological interventionNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile apps are being viewed as a new solution for post-operative monitoring of surgical patients. Mobile phone monitoring of patients in the post-operative period can allow expedited discharge and may allow early detection of complications. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the current study was to assess the feasibility of using a mobile app for the monitoring of post-operative quality of recovery at home following surgery in an ambulatory setting. METHODS: We enrolled 65 consecutive patients (n=33, breast reconstruction surgery; n=32, orthopedic surgery) and asked them to use a mobile phone daily to complete a validated quality of recovery scale (QoR-9) and take photographs of the surgical site for the first 30 days post-op. Surgeons were asked to review patient-entered data on each patient in their roster daily. A semistructured questionnaire was administered to patients and surgeons to assess satisfaction and feasibility of the mobile device. RESULTS: All 65 patients completed the study. The mean number of logins was 23.9 (range 7-30) for the breast patients and 19.3 (range 5-30) for the orthopedic patients. The mean number of logins was higher in the first 14 days compared to the 15-30 days post-op for both breast patients (13.4 vs 10.5; P<.001) and for the orthopedic patients (13.4 vs 6.0; P<.001). The mean score for overall satisfaction with using the mobile device was 3.9 for breast patients and 3.7 for orthopedic patients (scored from 1 (poor) to 4 (excellent)). Surgeons reported on the easy-to-navigate design, the portability to monitor patients outside of hospital, and the ability of the technology to improve time efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mobile apps for monitoring the quality of recovery in post-operative patients at home was feasible and acceptable to patients and surgeons in the current study. Future large scale studies in varying patient populations are required.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.175
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations205
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryFrench-language works237,207