A Patient-Centered Mobile Health System That Supports Asthma Self-Management (breathe): Design, Development, and Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled asthma poses substantial negative personal and health system impacts. Web-based technologies, including smartphones, are novel means to enable evidence-based care and improve patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to design, develop, and assess the utilization of an asthma collaborative self-management (CSM) platform (breathe) using content based on international evidence-based clinical guidelines. METHODS: We designed and developed breathe as a Web-based mobile health (mHealth) platform accessible on smartphones, tablets, or desktop with user-centered design methods and International Organization for Standardization-certified quality development processes. Moreover, breathe was envisioned as a multifunctional, CSM mHealth platform, with content based on international clinical practice guidelines and compliant with national privacy and security specifications. The system enabled CSM (patient, provider, and breathe) and self-monitoring of asthma patients through (1) assessment of asthma control, (2) real-time access to a dynamic asthma action plan, (3) access to real-time environmental conditions, and (4) risk-reduction messaging. The data collection protocol collected user data for 12 months, with clinic visits at baseline and 6 and 12 months. Utilization outcomes included user interactions with the platform, user impressions, self-reported medication use, asthma symptom profile, reported peak flow measurement, and the delivery and impact of email reminders. RESULTS: We enrolled 138 patients with a mean age of 45.3 years to receive the breathe intervention. Majority were female (100/138, 72.5%), had a smartphone (92/138, 66.7%), and had a mean Asthma Control Test score of 18.3 (SD 4.9). A majority reported that breathe helped in the management of their asthma. Moreover, breathe scored 71.1 (SD 18.9) on the System Usability Scale. Overall, 123 patients had complete usage analytics datasets. The platform sent 7.96 reminder emails per patient per week (pppw), patients accessed breathe 3.08 times, journaled symptoms 2.56 times, reported medication usage 0.30 times, and reported peak flow measurements 0.92 times pppw. Furthermore, breathe calculated patients' action plan zone of control 2.72 times pppw, with patients being in the green (well-controlled) zone in 47.71% (8300/17,396) of the total calculations. Usage analysis showed that 67.5% (83/123) of the participants used the app at week 4 and only 57.7% (71/123) by week 45. Physician visits, email reminders, and aged 50 years and above were associated with higher utilization. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with asthma reported good usability and high satisfaction levels, reacted to breathe notifications, and had confidence in the platform's assessment of asthma control. Strong utilization was seen at the intervention's initiation, followed by a rapid reduction in use. Patient reminders, physician visits, and being aged 50 years and above were associated with higher utilization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01964469; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01964469.

Assessing the burden of childhood asthma: validation of electronic versions of the Mini Pediatric and Pediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaires.

PURPOSE: To validate electronic versions of the Mini Pediatric and Pediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaires (MiniPAQLQ and PACQLQ, respectively), determine completion times and correlate QOL of children and caregivers. METHODS: A total of 63 children and 64 caregivers completed the paper and electronic MiniPAQLQ or PACQLQ. Agreement between versions of each questionnaire was summarized by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). The correlation between MiniPAQLQ and PACQLQ scores from child-caregiver pairs was assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: There was no significant difference (mean difference = 0.1, 95% CI -0.1, 0.2) in MiniPAQLQ Overall Scores between paper (5.9 ± 1.0, mean ± SD) and electronic (5.8 ± 1.0) versions, or any of the domains. ICCs ranged from 0.89 (Overall) to 0.86 (Emotional Function). Overall PACQLQ scores for both versions were comparable (5.9 ± 0.9 and 5.8 ± 1.0; mean difference = 0.0; 95% CI -0.1, 0.2). ICCs ranged from 0.81 (Activity Limitation) to 0.88 (Emotional Function). The electronic PACQLQ took 26 s longer (95% CI 11, 41; p < 0.001). Few participants (3-11%) preferred the paper format. MiniPAQLQ and PACQLQ scores were significantly correlated (all p < 0.05) for Overall (r paper = 0.33, r electronic = 0.27) and Emotional Function domains (r paper = 0.34, r electronic = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: These electronic QOL questionnaires are valid, and asthma-related QOL of children and caregivers is related.

Development and implementation of an electronic asthma record for primary care: integrating guidelines into practice.

RATIONALE: Evidence-based practice may be enhanced by integrating knowledge translation tools into electronic medical records (EMRs). We examined the feasibility of incorporating an evidence-based asthma care map (ACM) into Primary Care (PC) EMRs, and reporting on performance indicators. METHODS: Clinicians and information technology experts selected 69 clinical and administrative variables from the ACM template. Four Ontario PC sites using EMRs were recruited to the study. Certified Asthma Educators used the electronic ACM for patient assessment and management. De-identified data from consecutive asthma patients were automatically transmitted to a secure central server for analysis. RESULTS: Of the four sites recruited, two sites using "stand-alone" EMR systems were able to incorporate the selected ACM variables into an electronic format and participate in the pilot. Data were received on 161 visits by 130 patients aged 36.5 ± 26.9 (mean ± SD) (range 2-93) years. Ninety-four percent (65/69) of the selected ACM variables could be analyzed. Reporting capabilities included: individual patient, individual site and aggregate reports. Reports illustrated the ability to measure performance (e.g. number of patients in control, proportion of asthma diagnoses confirmed by an objective measure of lung function), benchmark and use EMR data for disease surveillance (e.g. number of smokers and the individuals with suspected work-related asthma). CONCLUSIONS: Integration of this evidence-based ACM into different EMRs was successful and permitted patient outcomes monitoring. Standardized data definitions and terminology are essential in order for EMR data to be used for performance measurement, benchmarking and disease surveillance.