Content and Quality of Mobile Apps for the Monitoring of Musculoskeletal or Neuropathic Pain in Australia: Systematic Evaluation.

Background: Mobile apps offer a potential mechanism for people with persistent pain to monitor pain levels conveniently within their own environment and for clinicians to remotely monitor their patients' pain. However, the quality of currently available apps and the usefulness of included features from a clinical perspective are not known. Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the content and quality of currently available smartphone apps designed for monitoring the intensity or presence of musculoskeletal or neuropathic pain. Methods: A systematic search was performed in the Australian Apple and Google Play stores. Apps were included if they were designed to monitor the intensity or presence of musculoskeletal or neuropathic pain and were available in the English language within the Australian app stores. Data pertaining to the intended use of the app and clinical population were extracted by using a custom-designed data extraction form, and app quality was assessed by using the 23-item Mobile App Rating Scale. Results: Of the 2190 apps screened, 49 met the inclusion criteria. Apps were primarily designed for adult users (36/49, 73%) with nonspecific musculoskeletal or neuropathic pain conditions, arthritis, and joint pain. All apps monitored pain intensity, with almost half (23/49, 47%) also specifying pain location. Overall, the mean quality scores from the Mobile App Rating Scale ranged from 1.5 to 4.4 (out of 5.0). Between 20% (10/49) and 22% (11/49) of apps involved clinicians, consumers, or both in their development, and 20% (10/49) had published literature related to the development or use of the app in clinical scenarios. Although 71% (35/49) had data sharing features, only 5 apps enabled client-clinician communication through the app. Conclusions: The overall quality of mobile apps that are currently available for monitoring pain intensity is acceptable. Presently, mobile apps for remote pain monitoring lack functionality for clinicians to view data between consults. Both users and clinicians should be aware of the limitations of these apps and make informed choices in using or recommending apps that best suit the clinical need.

Physical findings differ between individuals with greater trochanteric pain syndrome and healthy controls: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Understanding of the biopsychosocial characteristics of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS), a prevalent lower limb tendinopathy, is currently lacking. OBJECTIVES: To quantify differences in participant characteristics between individuals with GTPS and healthy control participants. DESIGN: Systematic review of original studies with meta-analyses where appropriate. METHODS: A comprehensive electronic search was undertaken in Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL for terms referring to GTPS. Studies that provided comparison of individuals with clinically characterized GTPS with healthy controls were included. Study quality was rated with the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Cross Sectional Studies. Standardized mean differences were calculated and supported by narrative synthesis or meta-analyses where appropriate. Certainty of evidence was assessed based on the GRADE guidelines. RESULTS: The search revealed 2798 studies, of which 13 studies from five research groups were included. There were 229 participants with at least three months duration of GTPS and 193 control participants. Individuals with GTPS displayed larger greater trochanteric width, greater body mass index, lower hip abductor muscle strength, higher hip abductor muscle activity, altered single leg loading and gait parameters including shorter step length and velocity. No studies investigating psychological features or sensory perception were identified. Quality of life was investigated in a single study. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to healthy controls, participants with GTPS are more overweight, have poorer hip abductor muscle function and altered gait parameters. Overall quality of evidence across studies was very low based on GRADE guidelines.