Background: There are an estimated 800,000 suicides per year globally, and approximately 16,000,000 suicide attempts. Mobile apps may help address the unmet needs of people at risk. We assessed adherence of suicide prevention advice in depression management and suicide prevention apps to six evidence-based clinical guideline recommendations: mood and suicidal thought tracking, safety plan development, recommendation of activities to deter suicidal thoughts, information and education, access to support networks, and access to emergency counseling. Methods: A systematic assessment of depression and suicide prevention apps available in Google Play and Apple’s App Store was conducted. Apps were identified by searching 42matters in January 2019 for apps launched or updated since January 2017 using the terms “depression,” “depressed,” “depress,” “mood disorders,” “suicide,” and “self-harm.” General characteristics of apps, adherence with six suicide prevention strategies identified in evidence-based clinical guidelines using a 50-question checklist developed by the study team, and trustworthiness of the app based on HONcode principles were appraised and reported as a narrative review, using descriptive statistics. Results: The initial search yielded 2690 potentially relevant apps. Sixty-nine apps met inclusion criteria and were systematically assessed. There were 20 depression management apps (29%), 3 (4%) depression management and suicide prevention apps, and 46 (67%) suicide prevention apps. Eight (12%) depression management apps were chatbots. Only 5/69 apps (7%) incorporated all six suicide prevention strategies. Six apps (6/69, 9%), including two apps available in both app stores and downloaded more than one million times each, provided an erroneous crisis helpline number. Most apps included emergency contact information (65/69 apps, 94%) and direct access to a crisis helpline through the app (46/69 apps, 67%). Conclusions: Non-existent or inaccurate suicide crisis helpline phone numbers were provided by mental health apps downloaded more than 2 million times. Only five out of 69 depression and suicide prevention apps offered all six evidence-based suicide prevention strategies. This demonstrates a failure of Apple and Google app stores, and the health app industry in self-governance, and quality and safety assurance. Governance levels should be stratified by the risks and benefits to users of the app, such as when suicide prevention advice is provided.

Background: Approximately 1 in 3 adults live with multiple chronic diseases. Digital health is being harnessed to improve continuity of care and management of chronic diseases. However, meaningful uptake of digital health for chronic disease management remains low. It is unclear how these innovations have been implemented and evaluated. Objective: This scoping review aims to identify how digital health innovations for chronic disease management have been implemented and evaluated: what implementation frameworks, methods, and strategies were used; how successful these strategies were; key barriers and enablers to implementation; and lessons learned and recommendations shared by study authors. Methods: We used the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. Five databases were searched for studies published between January 2015 and March 2023: PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and IEEE Xplore. We included primary studies of any study design with any type of digital health innovations for chronic diseases that benefit patients, caregivers, or health care professionals. We extracted study characteristics; type of digital health innovation; implementation frameworks, strategies, and outcome measures used; barriers and enablers to implementation; lessons learned; and recommendations reported by study authors. We used established taxonomies to synthesize extracted data. Extracted barriers and enablers were grouped into categories for reporting. Descriptive statistics were used to consolidate extracted data. Results: A total of 252 studies were included, comprising mainly mobile health (107/252, 42.5%), eHealth (61/252, 24.2%), and telehealth (97/252, 38.5%), with some studies involving more than 1 innovation. Only 23 studies (23/252, 9.1%) reported using an implementation science theory, model, or framework; the most common were implementation theories, classic theories, and determinant frameworks, with 7 studies each. Of 252 studies, 144 (57.1%) used 2 to 5 implementation strategies. Frequently used strategies were “obtain and use patient or consumer feedback” (196/252, 77.8%); “audit and provide feedback” (106/252, 42.1%); and piloting before implementation or “stage implementation scale-up” (85/252, 33.7%). Commonly measured implementation outcomes were acceptability, feasibility, and adoption of the digital innovation. Of 252 studies, 247 studies (98%) did not measure service outcomes, while patient health outcomes were measured in 89 studies (35.3%). The main method used to assess outcomes was surveys (173/252, 68.7%), followed by interviews (95/252, 37.7%). Key barriers impacting implementation were data privacy concerns and patient preference for in-person consultations. Key enablers were training for health care workers and personalization of digital health features to patient needs. Conclusions: This review generated a summary of how digital health in chronic disease management is currently implemented and evaluated and serves as a useful resource for clinicians, researchers, health system managers, and policy makers planning real-world implementation. Future studies should investigate whether using implementation science frameworks, including how well they are used, would yield better outcomes compared to not using them.

Background: The availability of smartphone health apps empowers people to manage their own health. Currently, there are over 300,000 health apps available in the market targeting a variety of user needs from weight loss to management of chronic conditions, with diabetes being the most commonly targeted condition. To date, health apps largely fall outside government regulation, and there are no official guidelines to help clinicians and patients in app selection. Patients commonly resort to the internet for suggestions on which diabetes app to use. Objective: The objective of this study was to investigate apps identified through a Google search and characterize these apps in terms of features that support diabetes management. Methods: We performed a Google search for the “best diabetes apps 2017” and explored the first 4 search results. We identified and compiled a list of the apps recommended in the returned search results, which were Web articles. Information about each app was extracted from the papers and corresponding app store descriptions. We examined the apps for the following diabetes management features: medication management, blood glucose self-management, physical activity, diet and nutrition, and weight management. Results: Overall, 26 apps were recommended in 4 papers. One app was listed in all 4 papers, and 3 apps appeared on 3 of the 4 lists. Apart from one paper, there were no explicit criteria to justify or explain the selection of apps. We found a wide variation in the type and the number of diabetes management features in the recommended apps. Five apps required payment to be used. Two-thirds of the apps had blood glucose management features, and less than half had medication management features. The most prevalent app features were nutrition or diet-related (19/24, 79%) and physical activity tracking (14/24, 58%). Conclusions: The ambiguity of app selection and the wide variability in key features of the apps recommended for diabetes management may pose difficulties for patients when selecting the most appropriate app. It is critical to involve patients, clinicians, relevant professional bodies, and policy makers to define the key features an app should have for it to be classified as a “diabetes management” app. The lessons learned here may be extrapolated for the development and recommendation of apps for the management of other chronic conditions.

Background: The efficacy of smartphone apps for improving medication adherence in type 2 diabetes is not well studied in Asian populations.Objective: This study aimed to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and clinical outcomes of using a smartphone app to improve medication adherence in a multiethnic Asian population with type 2 diabetes.Methods: We block randomized 51 nonadherent and digitally literate patients with type 2 diabetes between the ages of 21 and 75 years into two treatment arms (control: usual care; intervention: usual care+Medisafe app) and followed them up for 12 weeks. Recruitment occurred at a public tertiary diabetes specialist outpatient center in Singapore. The intervention group received email reminders to complete online surveys monthly, while the control group only received an email reminder(s) at the end of the study. Barriers to medication adherence and self-appraisal of diabetes were assessed using the Adherence Starts with Knowledge-12 (ASK-12) and Appraisal of Diabetes Scale (ADS) questionnaires at baseline and poststudy in both groups. Perception toward medication adherence and app usage, attitude, and satisfaction were assessed in the intervention group during and after the follow-up period. Sociodemographic data were collected at baseline. Clinical data (ie, hemoglobin A1c, body mass index, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, and total cholesterol levels) were extracted from patients’ electronic medical records.Results: A total of 51 (intervention group: 25 [49%]; control group: 26 [51%]) participants were randomized, of which 41 (intervention group: 22 [88.0%]; control group: 19 [73.1%]) completed the poststudy survey. The baseline-adjusted poststudy ASK-12 score was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (mean difference: 4.7, P=.01). No changes were observed in the clinical outcomes. The average 12-week medication adherence rate of participants tracked by the app was between 38.3% and 100% in the intervention group. The majority (>80%) of the participants agreed that the app was easy to use and made them more adherent to their medication.Conclusions: Our feasibility study showed that among medication-nonadherent patients with type 2 diabetes, a smartphone app intervention was acceptable, improved awareness of medication adherence, and reduced self-reported barriers to medication adherence, but did not improve clinical outcomes in a developed Asian setting.

Consumers receive over 27 million antibiotic prescriptions annually in Australian primary healthcare. Hence, consumers are a key group to engage in the fight against antibiotic resistance. There is a paucity of research pertaining to consumers in the Australian healthcare environment. This study aimed to investigate the perspectives, attitudes and behaviours of Australian consumers on antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance, to inform national programs for reducing inappropriate antibiotic consumption. Semi-structured interviews with 32 consumers recruited via convenience and snowball sampling from a university population in South East Queensland. Interview transcripts were deductively and inductively coded. Main themes were identified using iterative thematic analysis. Three themes emerged from the analysis, to elucidate factors affecting antibiotic use: (a) prescription type; (b) consumer attitudes, behaviours, skills and knowledge; and (c) consumer engagement with antibiotic resistance. Consumers held mixed views regarding the use of delayed antibiotic prescriptions, and were often not made aware of the use of repeat antibiotic prescriptions. Consumers with regular general practitioners were more likely to have shared expectations regarding minimising the use of antibiotics. Even so, advice or information mediated by general practitioners was influential with all consumers; and helped to prevent inappropriate antibiotic use behaviours. Consumers were not aware of the free Return of Unwanted Medicines service offered by pharmacies and disposed of leftover antibiotics through household waste. To engage with mitigating antibiotic resistance, consumers required specific information. Previous public health campaigns raising awareness of antibiotics were largely not seen by this sample of consumers. Australian consumers have specific information needs regarding prescribed antibiotics to enable appropriate antibiotic use behaviours. Consumers also have expectations for high quality general practice consults conducted in a manner that increases consumer confidence in the treatment decision, regardless of whether an antibiotic is prescribed. To reduce inappropriate consumption of antibiotics and to more fully engage Australian consumers in mitigating antibiotic resistance, changes in health policy and practice are required.