A survey of mHealth use from a physician perspective in paediatric emergency care in the UK and Ireland.

There has been a drive towards increased digitalisation in healthcare. The aim was to provide a snapshot of current apps, instant messaging, and smartphone photography use in paediatric emergency care. A web-based self-report questionnaire was performed. Individual physicians working in paediatric emergency care recorded their personal practice. One hundred ninety-eight medical doctors completed the survey. Eight percent of respondents had access to institutional mobile devices to run medical apps. Eighty-six percent of respondents used medical apps on their personal mobile device, with 78% using Apple iOS devices. Forty-seven percent of respondents used formulary apps daily. Forty-nine percent of respondents had between 1-5 medical apps on their personal mobile device. Respondents who used medical apps had a total of 845 medical apps installed on their personal device, accounted for by 56 specific apps. The British National Formulary (BNF/BNFc) app was installed on the personal mobile device of 96% of respondents that use medical apps. Forty percent of respondents had patient confidentiality concerns when using medical apps. Thirty-eight percent of respondents have used consumer instant messaging services, 6% secure specialist messaging services, and 29% smartphone photography when seeking patient management advice. CONCLUSION: App use on the personal mobile devices, in the absence of access to institutional devices, was widespread, especially the use of a national formulary app. Instant messaging and smartphone photography were less common. A strategic decision has to be made to either provide staff with institutional devices or use software solutions to address data governance concerns when using personal devices. What is Known: • mHealth use by junior doctors and medical students is widespread. • Clinicians' use of instant messaging apps such as WhatsApp is the widespread in the UK and Ireland, in the absence of alternatives. What is New: • Personal mobile device use was widespread in the absence of alternatives, with the British National Formulary nearly universally downloaded to physicians' personal mobile devices. • A third of respondents used instant messaging and smartphone photography on their personal mobile device when seeking patient management advice from other teams in the absence of alternatives.

Prescribing in a paediatric emergency: A PERUKI survey of prescribing and resuscitation aids.

AIM: The aim was to investigate the use of paper-based and electronic prescribing and resuscitation aids in paediatric emergency care from a departmental and individual physician perspective. METHODS: A two-stage web-based self-report questionnaire was performed. In stage (i), a lead investigator at PERUKI sites completed a department-level survey; in stage (ii), individual physicians recorded their personal practice. RESULTS: The site survey was completed by 46/54 (85%) of PERUKI sites. 198 physicians completed the individual physicians' survey. Individual physicians selected the use of formulary apps for checking of medication dosages nearly as often as hardcopy formularies. The APLS WETFLAG calculation and hardcopy aids were widely accepted in both surveys. A third of sites accepted and half of the individual physicians selected resuscitation apps on the personal mobile device as paediatric resuscitation aids. CONCLUSION: Our survey shows a high penetrance of the British National Formulary app, a success of NHS digital policy and strategy. Despite potential advantages, many physicians in our survey do not use resuscitation apps. Reluctance to engage with apps is likely to be multifactorial and includes human factors. These obstacles need to be overcome to create a digital healthcare culture.