Centre for Digital Transformation of Health - Research Publications
Now showing items 1-2 of 2
Preoperative opioid use and complications following total joint replacement: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
(BMJ Journals, 2020-06-16)
INTRODUCTION: Mounting evidence now indicates that preoperative opioid use is associated with an array of complications following total joint replacement (TJR). However, evidence of these risks remains fragmented. A comprehensive and well-integrated understanding of this body of evidence is necessary to appropriately inform treatment decisions, the allocation of limited healthcare resources, and the direction of future clinical research. The proposed systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify and synthesise the available evidence of an association between opioid use prior to TJR and postoperative complications, categorised by complication type. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from inception to April 2020. Observational and experimental studies that compare preoperative opioid users who have undergone elective TJR to opioid naïve TJR patients will be included. The primary outcomes will be postoperative complications, which will be categorised as either mortality, morbidity, or joint-related complications. The secondary outcomes will be persistent postoperative opioid use, readmission, and length of stay. Individual study quality will be assessed using the relevant NIH-NHLBI study quality assessment tools. Findings will be reported in narrative and tabular form, and, where possible, odds ratios (dichotomous outcomes) or standardised mean differences (continuous outcomes) will be reported with 95% confidence intervals. Where appropriate, random effect meta-analyses will be conducted for each outcome, and heterogeneity will be quantified using the I2 statistic and Cochran's Q test. This study will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval will not be required as no primary or private data are being collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presentation at academic conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020153047.
Person-Generated Health Data in Simulated Rehabilitation Using Kinect for Stroke: Literature Review.
(JMIR Publications Inc., 2018-05-08)
BACKGROUND: Person- or patient-generated health data (PGHD) are health, wellness, and clinical data that people generate, record, and analyze for themselves. There is potential for PGHD to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of simulated rehabilitation technologies for stroke. Simulated rehabilitation is a type of telerehabilitation that uses computer technologies and interfaces to allow the real-time simulation of rehabilitation activities or a rehabilitation environment. A leading technology for simulated rehabilitation is Microsoft's Kinect, a video-based technology that uses infrared to track a user's body movements. OBJECTIVE: This review attempts to understand to what extent Kinect-based stroke rehabilitation systems (K-SRS) have used PGHD and to what benefit. METHODS: The review is conducted in two parts. In part 1, aspects of relevance for PGHD were searched for in existing systematic reviews on K-SRS. The following databases were searched: IEEE Xplore, Association of Computing Machinery Digital Library, PubMed, Biomed Central, Cochrane Library, and Campbell Collaboration. In part 2, original research papers that presented or used K-SRS were reviewed in terms of (1) types of PGHD, (2) patient access to PGHD, (3) PGHD use, and (4) effects of PGHD use. The search was conducted in the same databases as part 1 except Cochrane and Campbell Collaboration. Reference lists on K-SRS of the reviews found in part 1 were also included in the search for part 2. There was no date restriction. The search was closed in June 2017. The quality of the papers was not assessed, as it was not deemed critical to understanding PGHD access and use in studies that used K-SRS. RESULTS: In part 1, 192 papers were identified, and after assessment only 3 papers were included. Part 1 showed that previous reviews focused on technical effectiveness of K-SRS with some attention on clinical effectiveness. None of those reviews reported on home-based implementation or PGHD use. In part 2, 163 papers were identified and after assessment, 41 papers were included. Part 2 showed that there is a gap in understanding how PGHD use may affect patients using K-SRS and a lack of patient participation in the design of such systems. CONCLUSIONS: This paper calls specifically for further studies of K-SRS-and for studies of technologies that allow patients to generate their own health data in general-to pay more attention to how patients' own use of their data may influence their care processes and outcomes. Future studies that trial the effectiveness of K-SRS outside the clinic should also explore how patients and carers use PGHD in home rehabilitation programs.