Puah SH, Goh CY, Chan CL, Teoh AKJ, Zhang H, Shen Z, Neo LP. Mobile device: a useful tool to teach inhaler devices to healthcare professionals.
BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION 2022;
22:238. [PMID:
35366867 PMCID:
PMC8976399 DOI:
10.1186/s12909-022-03302-0]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2021] [Accepted: 03/22/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Proper inhaler device usage is paramount for control of underlying obstructive airway disease. Hence, education to healthcare professionals who will eventually educate patients need to be done effectively. We developed an application for mobile devices for education on six medical inhaler devices, the metered-dose inhaler (MDI), Turbuhaler, Accuhaler, Breezhaler, Ellipta and Respimat, and studied if there were any difference between the application and the manufacturer's instructions on inhaler technique. The aim of this study is to see if inhaler education via a mobile phone app is comparable to manual instruction for health care professions.
METHODS
Participants, who were nursing students, were randomized to learn the inhaler devices via the manufacturer's instruction guide or a mobile device app designed specifically for education on inhaler devices.
RESULTS
There were 45 participants in each group. 78% of them were females with a median age of 21 (IQR 3). 67% used an Apple mobile device and the remainder used an Android device. The mobile device showed better total improvement points for the Turbuhaler device (262 vs 287 points; P = 0.02). Participants learning from the manufacturer's guide had a significantly higher total improvement points in the Breezhaler (370 vs 327 points; P < 0.01) and Ellipta (214 vs 174 points; P < 0.01) device. Both interventions showed improvement in total scores for demonstrating the correct usage of all inhaler devices. MDI has the least number of correct steps for both interventions. The participants' reported their mean (SD) self-rated knowledge was significantly higher for those using the app for all devices as compared to those that did not (4.33 (0.68) vs 4.73 (0.42); P = < 0.01). Self-reported confidence level was found to be higher in the mobile app group, but this was not statistically significant. The app was well received and scored of 4.42 of 5 with regards to its quality.
CONCLUSION
Using a mobile inhaler app is just as effective to teach inhaler device techniques to healthcare professionals and is likely a more convenient, versatile and important adjunct to learning.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
National Healthcare Group Ethics Board (2018/00960).
Collapse