Search

Background: Mobile devices provide new opportunities for the prevention of overweight and obesity in children. We aimed to co-create and test an app that offered comprehensible feedback to parents on their child's growth and delivered a suite of age-specific information about nutrition and activity. Methods: A two-phased approach was used to co-create the digital growth tool—See How They Grow—and test its feasibility. Phase one used focus groups (parents and professionals such as paediatricians and midwives) and a national on-line survey to gather requirements and build the app. Phase two involved testing the app over 12-weeks, with parents or carers of children aged ≤ 2-years. All research activities were undertaken exclusively through the app, and participants were recruited using social media and hard copy materials given to patents at a child health visit. Findings: Four focus groups and 101 responses to the national survey informed the features and functions to include in the final app. Two hundred and twenty-five participants downloaded the app, resulting in 208 eligible participants. Non-Māori/Non-Pacific (78%) and Māori (14%) had the highest downloads. Fifty-four per cent of participants were parents of children under 6-months. These participants were more likely to regularly use the app than those with children older than 6-months (64% vs 36%, P = 0.011). Over half of the participants entered three measures (n = 101, 48%). Of those that completed the follow-up survey (n = 101, 48%), 72 reported that the app helped them better understand how to interpret growth charts. Conclusion: The app was acceptable and with minor modifications, has the potential to be an effective tool to support parents understanding of growth trajectories for their children. A larger trial is needed to evaluate if the app can have a measurable impact on increasing knowledge and behaviour, and therefore on preventing childhood overweight and obesity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To assess the effect of a point of care (POC) device for testing lipids and HbA1c in addition to testing by community laboratory facilities (usual practice) on the completion of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessments in general practice. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial in 20 New Zealand general practices stratified by size and rurality and randomised to POC device plus usual practice or usual practice alone (controls). Patients aged 35–79 years were eligible if they met national guideline criteria for CVD risk assessment. Data on CVD risk assessments were aggregated using a web-based decision support programme common to each practice. Data entered into the on-line CVD risk assessment form could be saved pending blood test results. The primary outcome was the proportion of completed CVD risk assessments. Qualitative data on practice processes for CVD risk assessment and feasibility of POC testing were collected at the end of the study by interviews and questionnaire. The POC testing was supported by a comprehensive quality assurance programme. Results: A CVD risk assessment entry was recorded for 7421 patients in 10 POC practices and 6217 patients in 10 control practices; 99.5% of CVD risk assessments had complete data in both groups (adjusted odds ratio 1.02 [95%CI 0.61–1.69]). There were major external influences that affected the trial: including a national performance target for CVD risk assessment and changes to CVD guidelines. All practices had invested in systems and dedicated staff time to identify and follow up patients to completion. However, the POC device was viewed by most as an additional tool rather than as an opportunity to review practice work flow and leverage the immediate test results for patient education and CVD risk management discussions. Shortly after commencement, the trial was halted due to a change in the HbA1c test assay performance. The trial restarted after the manufacturing issue was rectified but this affected the end use of the device. Conclusions: Performance incentives and external influences were more powerful modifiers of practice behaviours than the POC device in relation to CVD risk assessment completion. The promise of combining risk assessment, communication and management within one consultation was not realised. With shifts in policy focus, the utility of POC devices for patient engagement in CVD preventive care may be demonstrated if fully integrated into the clinical setting. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]