mHealth interventions for diabetic patients might prove to be Efficacious

While there is certain evidence supporting the efficacy of mhealth interventions for sufferers with diabetes, the quality of past researches is substandard and extra research on efficacy is required.

That is the conclusion of a latest study, released on the day of March 1 in the journal PLoS ONE that was designed to critically appraise and consolidate evidence from several systematic reviews on the effectiveness of mHealth interventions for diabetic sufferers.

Researchers undertook a comprehensive search on several databases to recognize relevant systematic reviews released between the time period of January 1996 and December 2015. Based on that search, they independently recognized 15 reviews published between the time period of 2008 and 2014 that were eligible for inclusion in the study, extracted information using an electronic form and assessed the methodological quality of those reviews.

“The quality of the reviews varied considerably, and most of them had significant methodological limitations,” researchers discovered. The overview found that, “on average, mHealth interventions make better the glycemic control (HbA1c) compared to standard care or other non-mHealth approaches by as much as 0.8% for sufferers with type 2 diabetes and 0.3% for sufferers with type 1 diabetes, almost in the short-term (≤12 months). Although, limitations in the overall quality of evidence recommend that further research will likely have a significant impact in these estimates of effect.”

Spyros Kitsiou, an assistant professor in the Department of Biomedical and Health Information Sciences at the University of Illinois-Chicago’s College of Health Sciences and an author of the article, claims that overall the rigor of mHealth research—both randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews—must be improved because it’s “not methodologically sound” and has several weaknesses.

“There are various problems that develop risks of bias in terms of the interpretation of results,” claims Kitsiou.

Despite these restrictions, Kitsiou and his coworkers assert that mHealth interventions represent a promising approach for patients who need to handle their diabetes.

“Based on the available evidence, which is of moderate quality, we observed quantitative effects,” he analyzes, adding that, “mHealth seems to be more effective for type 2 diabetes.”

In accordance to the article’s authors, further research should concentrate on exploring the use and affect of diabetes mobile apps that are publicly available through the Apple and Google Play stores.

“Most trials included in the systematic reviews involved proprietary applications that aren’t available to the general public,” summarizes the article. “Although, as the rates of smartphone ownership and availability of diabetes self-management apps increase, it is significant to inquire the safety and clinical effectiveness of these apps.”