Background: Spinal cord injury (SCI) severely impairs the physical and mental health of patients, decreasing their self-efficacy in coping with daily life and quality of life (QOL). In China, a large gap remains between the complex long-term health needs of SCI patients and the current community care system. With the prevalence of mobile terminals, the usage of mobile health apps has the potential to fill this gap by extending qualified medical resources to the families of SCI patients. Our team developed the app Together for the transitional care of home-dwelling SCI patients in China. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of app-based transitional care on the self-efficacy and QOL of SCI patients. Methods: Through a three-round Delphi process, an Android app was designed. Both medical staff and patients could access the app. Medical staff used it for providing remote transitional care to SCI patients. Patients used it to view transitional care time and send messages to medical staff. Thereafter, a multicenter and assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted. Participants (n=98) who had SCI and lived at home following discharge were recruited and randomly assigned to a study group (n=49) and control group (n=49) using a randomized number list in four research centers. Patients in both groups received systematic discharge education before discharge. The study group received five follow-ups conducted by trained nurses through the app, which had four core functions, namely remote assessment, health education, interdisciplinary referral, and patient interaction, at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 following discharge. The control group received a routine telephone follow-up conducted by nurses at week 12 following discharge. The outcome measures were the Moorong Self-Efficacy Scale (MSES) and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores. Data were collected before discharge (T0) and at weeks 12 (T1) and 24 following discharge (T2). Differences between the groups were tested by repeated measures analysis of variance and simple effect analysis. Results: After the follow-up, the total MSES scores in the study group improved over time (T0=67.80, T1=71.90, and T2=76.29) and were higher than those in the control group (T2=64.49) at 24 weeks following discharge (simple effect analysis: F1=8.506, P=.004). Regarding the total SF-36 score, although it was higher in patients from the study group (T2=65.36) than those from the control group (T2=58.77) at 24 weeks following discharge, only time effects were significant (F2,95=6.671, P=.002) and neither the group effects nor the interaction effects influenced the change in QOL (group effects: F1,96=0.082, P=.78; interaction effects: F2,95=3.059, P=.052). Conclusions: This study confirmed that app-based transitional care improves the self-efficacy of SCI patients. Nevertheless, QOL improvement is not yet evident. Future investigations with larger sample sizes and longer observation periods are warranted to further verify the effects. Trial Registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-IPR-17012317; http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=19828

Background: Pressure injury is a common complication after a spinal cord injury. Long-term multidisciplinary follow-up is difficult after such patients have been discharged. Telemedicine promises to provide convenient and effective support for the prevention and treatment of pressure injury, but previous attempts to demonstrate that have produced inconsistent results. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of telemedicine in preventing and treating pressure injury among community-dwelling patients with spinal cord injury, and determine which telemedicine form is more effective. Methods: This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA-NMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Network Meta-Analysis) standards. Ten databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies related to the effectiveness of telemedicine intervention in patients with spinal cord injury. Two researchers worked independently and blindly selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The results were described as relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference and 95% CI. Results: The 35 studies comprised 25 randomized controlled trials and 10 quasi-experimental studies involving 3131 patients. The results showed that telemedicine can significantly (P<.05) reduce the incidence of pressure injury (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.14-0.41; P<.05; I2=0%), promote faster healing (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.85; P<.05; I2=0%), and yield lower scores on the pressure ulcer scale of healing (weighted mean difference=–1.98, 95% CI –3.51 to –0.46; P<.05; I2=0%). Cumulative ranking estimates showed that combining telemedicine with conventional intervention (93.5%) was the most effective approach. Conclusions: Telemedicine is a feasible way to prevent pressure injury among patients with spinal cord injuries. It can decrease the incidence and severity of pressure injury and accelerate patients’ healing without imposing economic burden. It is best used in tandem with other, more conventional interventions. Due to the limited quality and quantity of included studies, large-scale and well-designed randomized controlled trials are warranted.