Purpose of App Review
*To evaluate how well the Keynote app for iPad and iPhone can be used by health professionals to create and present digital slide shows.
*To evaluate how well the Keynote Remote app allows presenters to direct a slide presentation using an iPhone as a remote.
*To give a video demonstration of how Keynote works on the iPad and to show specific ways that health professionals can use it.
iMedicalApps
20 december 2012
IGZ gaat toezien op certificering medische apps
De Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg (IGZ) wil in 2013 gaan toezien op certificering van medische apps. Dat meldt Medisch Contact naar aanleiding van opmerkingen van senior-inspecteur ICT Ineke Roos op het congres ‘Mobile Healthcare 2012’.
Als een medische app wordt gebruikt voor diagnostiek of therapie is het volgens de wet een medisch hulpmiddel. Veel medische apps die momenteel verkrijgbaar zijn, vallen onder de wet. Om die reden wil de inspectie erop gaan toezien dat ze een zogeheten CE-certificering krijgen.
Huiver
De branche is huiverig voor strenge certificering omdat dit de apps duurder maakt. Dit maakt vermarkting lastig en schrikt potentiële klanten af. De meeste medische apps vallen vooralsnog in de minst strenge risicoklasse van de registratie. Dit betekent dat het bedrijf dat de app op de markt brengt, hem zelf mag certificeren door het maken en bijhouden van een technisch dossier.
Als een medische app wordt gebruikt voor diagnostiek of therapie is het volgens de wet een medisch hulpmiddel. Veel medische apps die momenteel verkrijgbaar zijn, vallen onder de wet. Om die reden wil de inspectie erop gaan toezien dat ze een zogeheten CE-certificering krijgen.
Huiver
De branche is huiverig voor strenge certificering omdat dit de apps duurder maakt. Dit maakt vermarkting lastig en schrikt potentiële klanten af. De meeste medische apps vallen vooralsnog in de minst strenge risicoklasse van de registratie. Dit betekent dat het bedrijf dat de app op de markt brengt, hem zelf mag certificeren door het maken en bijhouden van een technisch dossier.
19 december 2012
Test your diagnostic skills with the NEJM Image Challenge app
Purpose of App Review
Medical providers often live for the challenge of a difficult diagnosis. Combine that with high quality photos of rare and not-so-rare diseases and you have the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) Image Challenge App.
The NEJM Image Challenge App–most recently updated in December 2010 and available on the iPad and iPhone–is provided by the NEJM publishers.
The app randomly selects various dermatologic, radiologic and other pictures from the weekly published NEJM. The image is accompanied in the app with a multiple choice question, usually asking for diagnosis or presenting symptoms.
iMedicalApps
Medical providers often live for the challenge of a difficult diagnosis. Combine that with high quality photos of rare and not-so-rare diseases and you have the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) Image Challenge App.
The NEJM Image Challenge App–most recently updated in December 2010 and available on the iPad and iPhone–is provided by the NEJM publishers.
The app randomly selects various dermatologic, radiologic and other pictures from the weekly published NEJM. The image is accompanied in the app with a multiple choice question, usually asking for diagnosis or presenting symptoms.
iMedicalApps
11 december 2012
Reanimatie
Diegenen die een reanimatie-/AED-cursus hebben gevolgd, moeten hun kennis af en toe opfrissen. Deze App helpt daarbij. Ook biedt de applicatie aan hen ondersteuning bij het verlenen van hulp bij een hartstilstand. Een jaarlijkse herhalingscursus blijft belangrijk.
Reanimatie-App
Reanimatie-App
10 december 2012
Why you should avoid iBooks for your medical ebooks
Recently, my younger brother, who is a 3rd year medical student, purchased a medical review book through iBooks. He spent more than $50 on the book, and was using the highlighting feature and other annotation feature available in iBooks.
Then he asked me how he could access the book he purchased on his computer so he could have it open while he was in a lecture in class. I told him he was out of luck. By purchasing a book through iBooks, you lock yourself into Apple’s ecosystem, which is a walled garden.
The Kindle app by Amazon has a feature set that rivals iBooks, and most importantly, it’s device agnostic. This is crucial because the books you purchase through Amazon can be accessed on Android, iPhone and Kindle devices.
The most important part of this is you can view ebooks purchased through Kindle on your Mac — by downloading their app in the Mac App Store. Medical textbooks are usually not “casual reads”, and as mentioned above, having the ability to read the book on your desktop or laptop can be crucial.
Further, Amazon’s ebook section is vastly more populated with medical ebooks than Apple’s.
So if you’re going to purchase a medical ebook on iOS or Android — go through the Kindle app — it gives you significantly more flexibility and less buyers remorse.
iMedicalApps
Then he asked me how he could access the book he purchased on his computer so he could have it open while he was in a lecture in class. I told him he was out of luck. By purchasing a book through iBooks, you lock yourself into Apple’s ecosystem, which is a walled garden.
The Kindle app by Amazon has a feature set that rivals iBooks, and most importantly, it’s device agnostic. This is crucial because the books you purchase through Amazon can be accessed on Android, iPhone and Kindle devices.
The most important part of this is you can view ebooks purchased through Kindle on your Mac — by downloading their app in the Mac App Store. Medical textbooks are usually not “casual reads”, and as mentioned above, having the ability to read the book on your desktop or laptop can be crucial.
Further, Amazon’s ebook section is vastly more populated with medical ebooks than Apple’s.
So if you’re going to purchase a medical ebook on iOS or Android — go through the Kindle app — it gives you significantly more flexibility and less buyers remorse.
iMedicalApps
05 december 2012
Boek: De Toverberg - Thomas Mann
Eens wat anders nu over een echt gedrukt boek. Thomas Mann misschien wel de grootste Duitse auteu uit de vorige eeuw.
"De Toverberg is uitgegroeid tot een klassieker. Het zou eigenlijk in iedere medische opleiding verplicht gesteld moeten worden. Je kunt moeiteloos een inleiding in alle aspecten van de geneeskunde, inclusief alle competenties waarvan we hopen dat de dokter ze beheerst, rondom dit boek componeren en dan nog gespreksonderwerpen over hebben."
Een aanrader dus en leuk om te geven op Sinterklaas of met Kerstmis.
Medisch Contact jrg. 67, nr. 48, 2012 p.2706
"De Toverberg is uitgegroeid tot een klassieker. Het zou eigenlijk in iedere medische opleiding verplicht gesteld moeten worden. Je kunt moeiteloos een inleiding in alle aspecten van de geneeskunde, inclusief alle competenties waarvan we hopen dat de dokter ze beheerst, rondom dit boek componeren en dan nog gespreksonderwerpen over hebben."
Een aanrader dus en leuk om te geven op Sinterklaas of met Kerstmis.
Medisch Contact jrg. 67, nr. 48, 2012 p.2706
04 december 2012
Top Health Apps: Why They May Not Be So Promising
The rise of smart phones has resulted in an American obsession with applications, and has kept tech companies of all sizes squabbling to come up with the next big ‘app’. So it should come as no surprise that many developers have recently focused their attention on health related apps.
Currently, there are apps that can help manage sleep schedules, count calories, and calculate a healthy BMI. The list is endless. But there is also a new category of more technologically advanced health apps that, with the addition of supplemental devices, can transform a smart phone into a blood glucose meter, or give it the capability to administer an EKG.
These advances have generally been met with enthusiastic optimism. However, I see a few potential problems with the idea of moving important medical procedures out of a physician’s office and into the home,or anywhere else since smart phones can literally go anywhere.
The first major issue involves FDA regulation. It’s obvious that any app published for medical use needs to be certified and regulated. Think of the tragedies that would result if a blood glucose meter app were free to measure blood sugar according to a skewed scale. Just as there is regulation for medical devices, there needs to be regulation for medical apps.
So, is FDA regulation feasible?
It’s unclear. The tech companies developing these apps are accustomed to the exponential pace of technological innovation, while the FDA is more familiar with the drawn out process of regulation. The idea of waiting an additional year to publish apps — FDA approval can take six to 20 months — may be intolerable to many developers.
Even if developers decide to wait for an agonizingly drawn out approval, tech companies will be further hindered when they try to update their apps. It seems that any update delivered to an already approved health app would also need to pass FDA regulation. If not, what is the point of FDA regulation in the first place?
Surprisingly, current FDA regulation over medical apps is lax and has allowed a multitude of ineffective apps to become available to the public. The New England Center for Investigative Reporting determined that out of approximately 331 therapeutic health apps available since 2011, 43% rely on cell phone sound or light to "cure" conditions. Scientists are highly doubtful that these methods could actually work. The situation becomes more serious when a false cure has the potential to actually cause harm to the user.
If the FDA remains hesitant to strongly regulate health apps, the door will open for private companies to begin creating their own certification criteria. Happtique — the business arm of the Greater New York Hospital Association — has already begun developing an app certification program designed to ensure apps’ quality and the security of patient information.
Although I believe that federal regulation and certification would be the most effective way to filter ineffective apps out of the marketplace, I found the Happtique draft of App Certification Standards surprisingly comprehensive. The draft even includes a regulation standard under which apps are required to comply with all FDA regulatory mandates for medical devices.
But I’m still not convinced that this will eliminate the existence of ineffective apps, since these certification standards would only apply to apps available through Happtique. There needs to be a more universal regulation process.
Moving past regulation, I see one more potential problem with widespread health app use: the apps have the potential to act as substitutes for physicians. Although this may seem like a major benefit — especially to those who cannot afford to regularly see a physician — there can definitely be drawbacks as well.
An app may be able to administer a sophisticated exam, but can it interpret results and give advice as effectively as a human being? Can the average man or woman catch important subtleties in the EKG analysis provided by their smart phone?
Before we get overly excited and proclaim health apps to be the future of medicine, we should also consider to what degree we are willing to let these apps take over. It is my opinion that FDA approved health apps should act mostly as supplementary aids and should be monitored by physicians in real time.
There must be limitations on how far we let these apps monitor our health, or we could end up in a country full of people wrongly thinking their smart phone check ups are keeping them healthy.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/19978/top-health-apps-why-they-may-not-be-so-promising
Currently, there are apps that can help manage sleep schedules, count calories, and calculate a healthy BMI. The list is endless. But there is also a new category of more technologically advanced health apps that, with the addition of supplemental devices, can transform a smart phone into a blood glucose meter, or give it the capability to administer an EKG.
These advances have generally been met with enthusiastic optimism. However, I see a few potential problems with the idea of moving important medical procedures out of a physician’s office and into the home,or anywhere else since smart phones can literally go anywhere.
The first major issue involves FDA regulation. It’s obvious that any app published for medical use needs to be certified and regulated. Think of the tragedies that would result if a blood glucose meter app were free to measure blood sugar according to a skewed scale. Just as there is regulation for medical devices, there needs to be regulation for medical apps.
So, is FDA regulation feasible?
It’s unclear. The tech companies developing these apps are accustomed to the exponential pace of technological innovation, while the FDA is more familiar with the drawn out process of regulation. The idea of waiting an additional year to publish apps — FDA approval can take six to 20 months — may be intolerable to many developers.
Even if developers decide to wait for an agonizingly drawn out approval, tech companies will be further hindered when they try to update their apps. It seems that any update delivered to an already approved health app would also need to pass FDA regulation. If not, what is the point of FDA regulation in the first place?
Surprisingly, current FDA regulation over medical apps is lax and has allowed a multitude of ineffective apps to become available to the public. The New England Center for Investigative Reporting determined that out of approximately 331 therapeutic health apps available since 2011, 43% rely on cell phone sound or light to "cure" conditions. Scientists are highly doubtful that these methods could actually work. The situation becomes more serious when a false cure has the potential to actually cause harm to the user.
If the FDA remains hesitant to strongly regulate health apps, the door will open for private companies to begin creating their own certification criteria. Happtique — the business arm of the Greater New York Hospital Association — has already begun developing an app certification program designed to ensure apps’ quality and the security of patient information.
Although I believe that federal regulation and certification would be the most effective way to filter ineffective apps out of the marketplace, I found the Happtique draft of App Certification Standards surprisingly comprehensive. The draft even includes a regulation standard under which apps are required to comply with all FDA regulatory mandates for medical devices.
But I’m still not convinced that this will eliminate the existence of ineffective apps, since these certification standards would only apply to apps available through Happtique. There needs to be a more universal regulation process.
Moving past regulation, I see one more potential problem with widespread health app use: the apps have the potential to act as substitutes for physicians. Although this may seem like a major benefit — especially to those who cannot afford to regularly see a physician — there can definitely be drawbacks as well.
An app may be able to administer a sophisticated exam, but can it interpret results and give advice as effectively as a human being? Can the average man or woman catch important subtleties in the EKG analysis provided by their smart phone?
Before we get overly excited and proclaim health apps to be the future of medicine, we should also consider to what degree we are willing to let these apps take over. It is my opinion that FDA approved health apps should act mostly as supplementary aids and should be monitored by physicians in real time.
There must be limitations on how far we let these apps monitor our health, or we could end up in a country full of people wrongly thinking their smart phone check ups are keeping them healthy.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/19978/top-health-apps-why-they-may-not-be-so-promising
03 december 2012
Valideren van de controles van een laparoscopische simulator voor de Nintendo Wii: Kan een speciaal ontworpen video game worden gebruikt om elementaire laparoscopische vaardigheden te trainen
Virtual reality laparoscopische simulatoren zijn er al meer dan tien jaar en hebben bewezen kosten-en tijd-effectief te zijn in laparoscopische vaardigheden training. Echter, de meeste simulatoren beschouwd als "saai" door ingezetenen en zijn vaak slecht toegankelijk. Bijgevolg worden deze inrichtingen zelden gebruikt in werkelijke training. In een poging om een goedkope en aantrekkelijker simulator te maken, werd een op maat gemaakte Nintendo Wii game ontwikkeld. Uiteindelijk zou dit spel worden gebruikt om dezelfde basisvaardigheden te trainen als virtual reality laparoscopische simulatoren behoren te doen.
Maar voordat het zover is dat een video spel kan worden geïmplementeerd in een chirurgische opleiding, moet er worden gevalideerd volgens internationale normen. Het belangrijkste doel van deze studie was om de zogenaamde construct en concurrente validiteit van de controles van een prototype van het spel, die Wii Laparoscopie wordt genoemd voor nu te testen. In deze studie werden de elementaire laparoscopische vaardigheden van deskundigen (chirurgen, urologen en gynaecologen, n = 15) vergeleken met die van volledige beginners (internisten, n = 15), met behulp van de Wii-Laparoscopie (construct validiteit). Scores werden ook vergeleken met die van de FLS Peg Transfer test, een evaluatie van een werkwijze voor het meten basic laparoscopische vaardigheden in de Verenigde Staten (concurrente validiteit).
De resultaten toonden aan dat de deskundigen 111% sneller waren (p = 0,001) op de Wii Laparoscopie taak dan beginners. Ook scores van de FLS Peg Transfer test en de Wii Laparoscopie geven een significante hoge correlatie (r = 0,812, p <0>
Hoewel deze resultaten betekenen dat de huidige opstelling een solide constructie en concurrent validiteit bezit, moet de definitieve versie van de Wii Laparoscopie een soortgelijke validatieproces ondergaan, voordat het kan worden gebruikt in eenvoudige laparoscopische vaardigheidstrainingen. Proefschrift M.B. Jalink, 2012
Maar voordat het zover is dat een video spel kan worden geïmplementeerd in een chirurgische opleiding, moet er worden gevalideerd volgens internationale normen. Het belangrijkste doel van deze studie was om de zogenaamde construct en concurrente validiteit van de controles van een prototype van het spel, die Wii Laparoscopie wordt genoemd voor nu te testen. In deze studie werden de elementaire laparoscopische vaardigheden van deskundigen (chirurgen, urologen en gynaecologen, n = 15) vergeleken met die van volledige beginners (internisten, n = 15), met behulp van de Wii-Laparoscopie (construct validiteit). Scores werden ook vergeleken met die van de FLS Peg Transfer test, een evaluatie van een werkwijze voor het meten basic laparoscopische vaardigheden in de Verenigde Staten (concurrente validiteit).
De resultaten toonden aan dat de deskundigen 111% sneller waren (p = 0,001) op de Wii Laparoscopie taak dan beginners. Ook scores van de FLS Peg Transfer test en de Wii Laparoscopie geven een significante hoge correlatie (r = 0,812, p <0>
Hoewel deze resultaten betekenen dat de huidige opstelling een solide constructie en concurrent validiteit bezit, moet de definitieve versie van de Wii Laparoscopie een soortgelijke validatieproces ondergaan, voordat het kan worden gebruikt in eenvoudige laparoscopische vaardigheidstrainingen. Proefschrift M.B. Jalink, 2012
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
