Traumatology: Adoption of the Sm@rtEven Application for the Remote Evaluation of Patients and Possible Medico-Legal Implications

Telemedicine is the combination of technologies and activities that offer new remote ways of medical care. The Sm@rtEven application project is a remote assistance service that follows patients affected by lower limb fractures surgically treated at Galeazzi Orthopedic Institute (Milan, Italy). The Sm@rtEven application aims to evaluate the clinical conditions of patients treated for lower limb fracture after discharge from hospital using remote follow-up (FU). The project is not a substitute for traditional clinical consultations but an additional tool for a more complete and prolonged view over time. The Sm@rtEven application is installed on patients’ smartphones and is used daily to communicate with healthcare personnel. In the first protocol, patients had to complete different tasks for 30 days, such as monitoring the load progression on the affected limb, the number of steps during the day, and body temperature and completing a questionnaire. A simplified protocol was proposed due to the pandemic and logistical issues. The revised protocol enrolled patients after more than 30 days of their operation, prioritized the rehabilitation phase, and required patients to use the app for fewer days. After an initial phase of correct use, a reduction in patient compliance was gradually reported in the first protocol. However, patient compliance in the second protocol remained high (96.25%) in the recording of all the required parameters. The Sm@rtEven application has proven to be a valuable tool for following patients remotely, especially during the pandemic. Telemedicine has the same value as traditional clinical evaluations, and it enables patients to be followed over long distances and over time, minimizing any discomfort.

[1]  R. Solimini,et al.  Ethical and Legal Challenges of Telemedicine in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic , 2021, Medicina.

[2]  J. Berger-Groch,et al.  The Use of Mobile Applications for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Tumors in Orthopaedic Oncology – a Systematic Review , 2021, Journal of Medical Systems.

[3]  M. Roussot,et al.  Virtual phone clinics in orthopaedics: evaluation of clinical application and sustainability , 2021, BMJ open quality.

[4]  E. Marinelli,et al.  The COVID-19 pandemic and contact tracing technologies, between upholding the right to health and personal data protection. , 2021, European review for medical and pharmacological sciences.

[5]  S. Giannini,et al.  Providing high-quality care remotely to patients with rare bone diseases during COVID-19 pandemic , 2020, Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases.

[6]  C. Mateus,et al.  Telemedicine in the OECD: An umbrella review of clinical and cost-effectiveness, patient experience and implementation , 2020, PloS one.

[7]  Joseane O. V. Paiva,et al.  Mobile applications for elderly healthcare: A systematic mapping , 2020, PloS one.

[8]  C. Closa,et al.  [Telemedicine in rehabilitation: Post-COVID need and opportunity]. , 2020, Rehabilitación.

[9]  C. Jinks,et al.  Identifying and managing osteoporosis before and after COVID-19: rise of the remote consultation? , 2020, Osteoporosis International.

[10]  Antonette Mendoza,et al.  Hospital Bring-Your-Own-Device Security Challenges and Solutions: Systematic Review of Gray Literature , 2020, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[11]  B. Dear,et al.  Managing patients with chronic pain during the COVID-19 outbreak: considerations for the rapid introduction of remotely supported (eHealth) pain management services , 2020, Pain.

[12]  Joseph P. Wherton,et al.  Video consultations for covid-19 , 2020, BMJ.

[13]  F. Amenta,et al.  Telemedicine Practice: Review of the Current Ethical and Legal Challenges , 2020, Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association.

[14]  Bakheet Aljedaani,et al.  Challenges With Developing Secure Mobile Health Applications: Systematic Review , 2019, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[15]  Richard A. Parker,et al.  Comparing the content and quality of video, telephone, and face-to-face consultations: a non-randomised, quasi-experimental, exploratory study in UK primary care , 2019, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[16]  Lex van Velsen,et al.  Patient acceptance of a telemedicine service for rehabilitation care: A focus group study , 2019, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[17]  M. Galea Telemedicine in Rehabilitation. , 2019, Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America.

[18]  Carrie L. Kovarik,et al.  Bring-your-own-device in medical schools and healthcare facilities: A review of the literature , 2018, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[19]  E. Schemitsch,et al.  Rehabilitation after plate fixation of upper and lower extremity fractures. , 2018, Injury.

[20]  G. Montanari Vergallo,et al.  Guidelines and best practices: remarks on the Gelli-Bianco law. , 2018, La Clinica terapeutica.

[21]  James E. Sabin,et al.  Ethical practice in Telehealth and Telemedicine , 2017, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[22]  Vera Lúcia Raposo,et al.  Telemedicine: The legal framework (or the lack of it) in Europe , 2016, GMS Health Technology Assessment.

[23]  Nicolas Mounier,et al.  Mobile applications in oncology: is it possible for patients and healthcare professionals to easily identify relevant tools? , 2016, Annals of medicine.

[24]  Begoña García Zapirain,et al.  Security Recommendations for mHealth Apps: Elaboration of a Developer’s Guide , 2016, Journal of Medical Systems.

[25]  Stefano Omboni,et al.  Telemedicine and M-Health in Hypertension Management: Technologies, Applications and Clinical Evidence , 2016, High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention.

[26]  Laura Pugliese,et al.  Feasibility of the “Bring Your Own Device” Model in Clinical Research: Results from a Randomized Controlled Pilot Study of a Mobile Patient Engagement Tool , 2016, Cureus.

[27]  A. O’Cathain,et al.  Who does not participate in telehealth trials and why? A cross-sectional survey , 2015, Trials.

[28]  Deven McGraw,et al.  For telehealth to succeed, privacy and security risks must be identified and addressed. , 2014, Health affairs.

[29]  Marco D. Huesch,et al.  Privacy threats when seeking online health information. , 2013, JAMA internal medicine.

[30]  P. Clark,et al.  Telemedicine: medical, legal and ethical perspectives. , 2010, Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research.

[31]  Alison Bowes,et al.  Effectiveness of telemedicine: A systematic review of reviews , 2010, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[32]  Anabela Pinto,et al.  Home telemonitoring of non-invasive ventilation decreases healthcare utilisation in a prospective controlled trial of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis , 2010, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry.

[33]  P Baiardi,et al.  Multicenter randomised trial on home-based telemanagement to prevent hospital readmission of patients with chronic heart failure. , 2009, International journal of cardiology.

[34]  T. Miller,et al.  Between strangers: the practice of medicine online. , 2002, Health affairs.

[35]  Stefaan Callens,et al.  Telemedicine and European law. , 2002, Medicine and law.

[36]  G. Coster,et al.  Issues in Patient Compliance , 1997, Drugs.

[37]  R M Schulz,et al.  Patient compliance—an overview , 1992, Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

[38]  Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market , 2020, EU Digital Law.

[39]  M. Rodríguez Mariblanca,et al.  Mobile applications in children with cerebral palsy. , 2017, Neurología.

[40]  E. Marinelli,et al.  The static evolution of the new Italian code of medical ethics. , 2016, European review for medical and pharmacological sciences.