{"title":"识别和评估患者管理化脓性汗腺炎的移动和网络应用程序:应用程序商店的系统搜索和内容分析。","authors":"Caroline Glatzel, Tassilo Dege, Bernadette Glatzel, Matthias Goebeler, Dagmar Presser, Astrid Schmieder","doi":"10.2196/69030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by painful nodules, abscesses, and fistulas in intertriginous sites. It significantly impacts patients' quality of life. Early diagnosis and timely treatment are essential for disease control. Recurrent flares, suboptimal therapies, and prolonged misdiagnosis place a significant burden on both patients and health care systems.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to identify mobile health apps (MHAs) for patients with HS and evaluate their quality through assessments by both patients and physicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two reviewers searched for mobile and web apps for HS, including those only available in German or English. Apps with advertising or non-patient-centered content and apps related to trials or conferences were excluded. Two apps met the criteria and were evaluated by 20 physicians and 27 patients using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), user version of the MARS (uMARS), German Mobile App Usability Questionnaire, and technology affinity tools (Affinity for Technology Interaction Scale and Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 2 apps for managing HS that met the inclusion criteria-the HSR-Patients app and the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app-from an initial pool of 29 proposed apps that included many nonmedical, non-HS-specific, and non-patient-centered apps. Patients rated the quality of the HSR-Patients app significantly higher than physicians (MARS: mean 3.01, SD 0.60 vs. uMARS: mean 3.53, SD 0.69; P=.009). In contrast, ratings for the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app did not differ significantly (physicians: mean 2.81, SD 0.55; patients: mean 2.72, SD 0.79; P=.69). Usability, assessed with the German Mobile App Usability Questionnaire, showed no significant difference between physicians and patients for either app. For the HSR-Patients app, physicians and patients rated usability at 4.37 (SD 0.86) and 4.72 (SD 1.21; P=.27), respectively. For the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app, physicians and patients rated usability at 3.88 (SD 0.77) and 3.38 (SD 1.35; P=.11), respectively. Patients showed a significantly higher general affinity for technology than physicians, as measured by the Affinity for Technology Interaction Scale (physicians: mean 3.62, SD 0.61; patients: mean 4.38, SD 1.30; P=.01). However, there was no significant difference in affinity for technology specifically when using mobile devices, as assessed by the Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire (physicians: mean 4.83, SD 0.25; patients: mean 4.69, SD 0.72; P=.41).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This evaluation highlights the limited availability of high-quality, HS management-specific MHAs and underscores the need for more targeted digital tools. Differences in evaluations between patients and physicians were evident, with patients focusing on usability and practical guidance, while physicians prioritized content and usability. Neither the HSR-Patients app or the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app demonstrated sufficient potential for long-term use, indicating the need for participatory development that includes all stakeholders.</p>","PeriodicalId":14756,"journal":{"name":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","volume":"13 ","pages":"e69030"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12400124/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying and Evaluating Mobile and Web Apps for Patients to Manage Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Caroline Glatzel, Tassilo Dege, Bernadette Glatzel, Matthias Goebeler, Dagmar Presser, Astrid Schmieder\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/69030\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by painful nodules, abscesses, and fistulas in intertriginous sites. It significantly impacts patients' quality of life. Early diagnosis and timely treatment are essential for disease control. Recurrent flares, suboptimal therapies, and prolonged misdiagnosis place a significant burden on both patients and health care systems.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to identify mobile health apps (MHAs) for patients with HS and evaluate their quality through assessments by both patients and physicians.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two reviewers searched for mobile and web apps for HS, including those only available in German or English. Apps with advertising or non-patient-centered content and apps related to trials or conferences were excluded. Two apps met the criteria and were evaluated by 20 physicians and 27 patients using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), user version of the MARS (uMARS), German Mobile App Usability Questionnaire, and technology affinity tools (Affinity for Technology Interaction Scale and Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 2 apps for managing HS that met the inclusion criteria-the HSR-Patients app and the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app-from an initial pool of 29 proposed apps that included many nonmedical, non-HS-specific, and non-patient-centered apps. Patients rated the quality of the HSR-Patients app significantly higher than physicians (MARS: mean 3.01, SD 0.60 vs. uMARS: mean 3.53, SD 0.69; P=.009). In contrast, ratings for the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app did not differ significantly (physicians: mean 2.81, SD 0.55; patients: mean 2.72, SD 0.79; P=.69). Usability, assessed with the German Mobile App Usability Questionnaire, showed no significant difference between physicians and patients for either app. For the HSR-Patients app, physicians and patients rated usability at 4.37 (SD 0.86) and 4.72 (SD 1.21; P=.27), respectively. For the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app, physicians and patients rated usability at 3.88 (SD 0.77) and 3.38 (SD 1.35; P=.11), respectively. Patients showed a significantly higher general affinity for technology than physicians, as measured by the Affinity for Technology Interaction Scale (physicians: mean 3.62, SD 0.61; patients: mean 4.38, SD 1.30; P=.01). However, there was no significant difference in affinity for technology specifically when using mobile devices, as assessed by the Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire (physicians: mean 4.83, SD 0.25; patients: mean 4.69, SD 0.72; P=.41).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This evaluation highlights the limited availability of high-quality, HS management-specific MHAs and underscores the need for more targeted digital tools. Differences in evaluations between patients and physicians were evident, with patients focusing on usability and practical guidance, while physicians prioritized content and usability. Neither the HSR-Patients app or the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app demonstrated sufficient potential for long-term use, indicating the need for participatory development that includes all stakeholders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14756,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JMIR mHealth and uHealth\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"e69030\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12400124/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JMIR mHealth and uHealth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/69030\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JMIR mHealth and uHealth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/69030","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Identifying and Evaluating Mobile and Web Apps for Patients to Manage Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Systematic Search in App Stores and Content Analysis.
Background: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by painful nodules, abscesses, and fistulas in intertriginous sites. It significantly impacts patients' quality of life. Early diagnosis and timely treatment are essential for disease control. Recurrent flares, suboptimal therapies, and prolonged misdiagnosis place a significant burden on both patients and health care systems.
Objective: We aimed to identify mobile health apps (MHAs) for patients with HS and evaluate their quality through assessments by both patients and physicians.
Methods: Two reviewers searched for mobile and web apps for HS, including those only available in German or English. Apps with advertising or non-patient-centered content and apps related to trials or conferences were excluded. Two apps met the criteria and were evaluated by 20 physicians and 27 patients using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), user version of the MARS (uMARS), German Mobile App Usability Questionnaire, and technology affinity tools (Affinity for Technology Interaction Scale and Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire).
Results: We identified 2 apps for managing HS that met the inclusion criteria-the HSR-Patients app and the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app-from an initial pool of 29 proposed apps that included many nonmedical, non-HS-specific, and non-patient-centered apps. Patients rated the quality of the HSR-Patients app significantly higher than physicians (MARS: mean 3.01, SD 0.60 vs. uMARS: mean 3.53, SD 0.69; P=.009). In contrast, ratings for the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app did not differ significantly (physicians: mean 2.81, SD 0.55; patients: mean 2.72, SD 0.79; P=.69). Usability, assessed with the German Mobile App Usability Questionnaire, showed no significant difference between physicians and patients for either app. For the HSR-Patients app, physicians and patients rated usability at 4.37 (SD 0.86) and 4.72 (SD 1.21; P=.27), respectively. For the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app, physicians and patients rated usability at 3.88 (SD 0.77) and 3.38 (SD 1.35; P=.11), respectively. Patients showed a significantly higher general affinity for technology than physicians, as measured by the Affinity for Technology Interaction Scale (physicians: mean 3.62, SD 0.61; patients: mean 4.38, SD 1.30; P=.01). However, there was no significant difference in affinity for technology specifically when using mobile devices, as assessed by the Mobile Device Proficiency Questionnaire (physicians: mean 4.83, SD 0.25; patients: mean 4.69, SD 0.72; P=.41).
Conclusions: This evaluation highlights the limited availability of high-quality, HS management-specific MHAs and underscores the need for more targeted digital tools. Differences in evaluations between patients and physicians were evident, with patients focusing on usability and practical guidance, while physicians prioritized content and usability. Neither the HSR-Patients app or the EHSF-Hidradenitis Suppurativa app demonstrated sufficient potential for long-term use, indicating the need for participatory development that includes all stakeholders.
期刊介绍:
JMIR mHealth and uHealth (JMU, ISSN 2291-5222) is a spin-off journal of JMIR, the leading eHealth journal (Impact Factor 2016: 5.175). JMIR mHealth and uHealth is indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE), and in June 2017 received a stunning inaugural Impact Factor of 4.636.
The journal focusses on health and biomedical applications in mobile and tablet computing, pervasive and ubiquitous computing, wearable computing and domotics.
JMIR mHealth and uHealth publishes since 2013 and was the first mhealth journal in Pubmed. It publishes even faster and has a broader scope with including papers which are more technical or more formative/developmental than what would be published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research.